Court File and Parties

CITATION: R. v. Lamoureux, 2009 ONCA 370

DATE: 20090505

DOCKET: C47877

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

Laskin, Cronk and LaForme JJ.A.

BETWEEN

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

and

Mark Pierre Lamoureux

Appellant

Howard L. Krongold, for the appellant

Holly Loubert, for the respondent

Heard and released orally: April 24, 2009

On appeal from the conviction entered on May 24, 2007 and the sentence imposed on August 14, 2007, by Justice Denis J. Power of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting without a jury.

ENDORSEMENT

[1] We did not call on the Crown on the appeal from the robbery conviction. Largely for the reasons set out in the Crown’s factum, we are not persuaded that the verdict is unreasonable.

[2] On the firearms convictions, we cannot be satisfied from the trial judge’s reasons that he made the requisite finding to the criminal standard of proof that the weapon in question was a firearm. Therefore, the convictions on counts 3 and 4 must be set aside and acquittals entered. As agreed by counsel, the convictions on counts 1, 2 and 5 are set aside and convictions for use and possession of an imitation firearm are substituted. The conviction on count 6 remains.

[3] In the light of the substituted convictions, the appellant is entitled to a reduction of his sentence. After taking account of pre-trial custody and in view of the appellant’s record, we reduce the sentence from five-and-a-half years to five years.

[4] As set out above, the conviction appeal is allowed in part and the sentence appeal is allowed.

“John Laskin J.A.”

“E.A. Cronk J.A.”

“H.S. LaForme J.A.”