DATE: 20050825

DOCKET: C41929

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

RE:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) – and – LEROY CHRISTOPHER HILTS (Appellant)

BEFORE:

GOUDGE, SIMMONS AND ARMSTRONG JJ.A.

COUNSEL:

Patrick McCann

for the appellant

Rick Visca

for the respondent

HEARD:

August 11, 2005

On appeal from the conviction by Justice Judith Beaman of the Ontario Court of Justice dated April 20, 2004 and from the sentence imposed by Justice Judith Beaman dated May 11, 2004.

E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] The appellant argues that the trial judge misapprehended the evidence in two important respects. We disagree. First, her finding that the dresser and the closet contained only men’s clothing was well founded in the evidence. There was clear evidence that the dresser contained men’s clothing and nothing to suggest that it might have also contained women’s clothing. There was also clear evidence that the closet appeared to contain only men’s clothing. Second, her finding that either Ms. Minott or the appellant had a key to the premises is an inference properly available from the evidence that they secured the door when they left.

[2] The appellant also argues that the trial judge effectively reversed the burden of proof by inferring that the appellant should have called the subtenants and should have called evidence to demonstrate that he was living elsewhere right up to and including the date of the alleged offence. Again, we disagree. We cannot read either inference into the reasons of the trial judge.

[3] Finally, the appellant says that the verdict is unreasonable. This argument must also fail. There was ample evidence to sustain her conclusion that the appellant was the occupant of the bedroom where the drugs were found, knew of them and controlled where they were. Most importantly there was drug trafficking paraphernalia in plain view in the main living area, the appellant was in the residence while a steady stream of people came and went in a manner suggestive of drug trafficking, and his personal identification was found in the dresser of the bedroom.

[4] The appeal must therefore be dismissed.

“S. T. Goudge J.A.”

“Janet Simmons J.A.”

“Robert P. Armstrong J.A.”