Court File and Parties

Citation: R. v. Michalopoulos, 2010 ONCA 203 Date: 2010-03-17 Docket: C50591

Court of Appeal for Ontario Before: Doherty, Armstrong and Watt JJ.A.

Between: Her Majesty the Queen, Respondent and Anastasios Michalopoulos, Applicant/Appellant

Counsel: Peter Thorning, for the applicant/appellant Greg Skerkowski, for the respondent

Heard and endorsed orally: March 10, 2010

On appeal from the decision by Justice Barbara A. Conway of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting as a summary conviction appeal court, dated June 25, 2009.

Endorsement

[1] The applicant seeks leave to appeal from a decision of Conway J. sitting as a Summary Conviction Appeal Court judge on appeal from a conviction for “over 80”.

[2] The applicant seeks leave to appeal on two grounds: (1) that the summary conviction appeal court judge erred in failing to order a new trial based on interventions of the trial judge and the conduct of the case in eliciting evidence of the essential elements of the prosecution’s case; and (2) that the summary conviction appeal court judge erred in failing to find that the trial judge erred in relying on the presumption of accuracy in a non-certificate case.

[3] Applying the principles articulated in R. v. R. (R.) (2008), 2008 ONCA 497, 234 C.C.C. (3d) 463 (Ont. C.A.), we are not persuaded that this is a case in which leave to appeal should be granted.

[4] In connection with the first proposed ground of appeal, the summary conviction appeal court judge was alive to the applicable standard to be applied in assessing the consequences of the judge’s intervention in the conduct of the prosecution. She applied those principles properly. The significance of the proposed ground to the administration of justice does not rise above the peculiar circumstances of this case and does not warrant granting leave to appeal.

[5] On the second proposed ground of appeal, we are not persuaded that the issue raised on this record raises an arguable ground of appeal. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed and leave to appeal refused.

“Doherty J.A.”

“Armstrong J.A.”

“David Watt J.A.”