CITATION: R. v. Mann, 2007 ONCA 146

DATE: 20070306

DOCKET: C45550

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

RE:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) – and – VALGINDER MANN (Appellant)

BEFORE:

O’CONNOR A.C.J. O., JURIANSZ and ROULEAU JJ.A.

COUNSEL:

Louis P, Strezos

for the appellant

Craig Harper

for the respondent

HEARD & RELEASED ORALLY:

March 01, 2007

On appeal from the decision of Justice Michael H. Tulloch of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting as a summary conviction appeal court judge, dated June 19, 2006, dismissing the appellant’s appeal from conviction and sentence by Justice Zuraw of the Ontario Court of Justice dated December 5, 2003.

E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] The appellant was convicted of assault with a weapon and sentenced to sixty days intermittent and eighteen months probation. He appealed conviction and sentence to the Superior Court of Justice. Some twenty-one months after argument of the appeal that court dismissed the appeal.

[2] In this court, the appellant submits, in essence, that the trial judge did not reconcile several contradictions in the evidence that were, in his view, significant and that required analysis. He submits that the trial judge essentially shifted the burden of proof.

[3] This was a one day trial. The decision and reasons were delivered the same day. The reasons are, in our view, adequate to outline the trial judge’s reasoning and how he reached his decision. The reasons adequately explain to the appellant why he was convicted and are sufficient to allow for appellate review. The appellant has not pointed to something in the reasons or elsewhere in the record that makes it clear that the trial judge applied a different standard in assessing the defence and Crown evidence.

[4] We, therefore dismiss the conviction appeal.

[5] As to sentence, we see no error in the trial judge’s decision. However, given the very lengthy delay at the summary conviction appeal stage, the fact that the appellant has already served four weekends of the intermittent sentence, has successfully completed his anger management program and his probation, as well as the changed circumstances of the appellant, we modify the sentence to time served.

“D. O’Connor A.C.J.O.”

“R. Juriansz J.A”

“Paul Rouleau J.A.”