CITATION: R. v. Kamateh, 2008 ONCA 280
DATE: 20080415
DOCKET: C43771
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
LASKIN, GILLESE JJ.A. and WHALEN J. (ad hoc)
BETWEEN:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
and
FANSU KAMATEH
Appellant
George Filipovic for the appellant
Steve Coroza and Holly Akin for the respondent
Heard and endorsed: April 11, 2007
On appeal from conviction by Justice Andromache Karakatsanis of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting with a jury, dated December 20, 2004 and sentence imposed January 31, 2005.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
[1] The appellant appeals his drug related conviction on a single ground: The trial judge failed to warn the jury not to engage in propensity reasoning. This warning was not sought by defence counsel at trial and was not given by the trial judge.
[2] We do not accept the appellant’s argument. The sole issue at trial was identity. The appellant fairly conceded that all the evidence at trial was admissible on all counts in the indictment. Having made that concession, we think that the instruction sought by the appellant would confuse the jury. Moreover, even if the trial judge had given the requested warning, she would have been obliged to tell the jury about the permissible use of propensity evidence. That instruction would not have benefited the appellant.
[3] Accordingly, the trial judge did not err by failing to warn the jury about propensity reasoning.
[4] We add that in our view this was an overwhelming Crown case.
[5] The appeal is dismissed.