CITATION: R. v. Elizee, 2010 ONCA 701
DATE: 20101022
DOCKET: C48033
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Sharpe, Blair and Rouleau JJ.A.
BETWEEN
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
and
George Elizee
Appellant
Howard L. Krongold, for the appellant
Leanne Salel, for the respondent
Heard: October 20, 2010
On appeal from the conviction imposed by Justice D. Rutherford of the Superior Court of Justice dated November 16, 2005.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
[1] The appellant complains that the trial judge failed to provide an adequate review of the evidence and, in particular, failed to provide the jury with a balanced charge by emphasizing the evidence of the complainant and minimizing the evidence of the appellant. This was a lengthy trial involving several counts and conflicting versions of the events from the complainant and the appellant. Trial judges have a duty to review the evidence and must be cautious about abrogating that responsibility to trial counsel’s addresses to the jury. While the trial judge certainly could have provided the jury with a fuller explanation of the evidence, we are not persuaded that at the end of the day the charge was inadequate taking into account the entire circumstances of this case. We are satisfied that the jury would have understood the defence advanced by the appellant and that his right to a fair was not compromised.
[2] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.