Court of Appeal for Ontario

Date: 2017-09-11 Docket: C62657 Judges: MacPherson, Rouleau and Miller JJ.A.

Between

Her Majesty the Queen Respondent

and

Joel Hayne Appellant

Counsel

For the Appellant: Kathryn Wells

For the Respondent: Luke Schwalm

Hearing and Appeal

Heard: September 8, 2017

On appeal from the conviction entered on June 22, 2016 and the sentence imposed on July 14, 2016 by Justice J.E. Allen of the Ontario Court of Justice.

Appeal Book Endorsement

Conviction Appeal

[1] The appellant appeals his conviction for driving a motor vehicle while disqualified.

[2] The sole issue on the appeal is the trial judge's treatment of the identification issue at trial. The appellant contends that the trial judge erred in two respects.

[3] First, the appellant submits that the trial judge did not take proper account of the frailties of the identification evidence of Officer Snyder.

[4] We do not accept this submission. This was not a 'generic description' trial. The core of Officer Snyder's identification of the appellant as the driver of the car that he declined to chase in a residential neighbourhood was his matching of a photograph of the appellant in his possession with the face of the driver in the Cadillac Escalade as it passed by him in his police cruiser. The circumstances for this match were excellent – the car approached him at low speed (15 – 20 kilometers per hour), he had a clear view of the appellant's face for several seconds, the view was through the clear glass front window of the Escalade, and the view was coupled with three different comparisons of the driver's face and the face in the photo in his cruiser.

[5] Second, the appellant contends that the trial judge erred by relying on Melissa Robert's evidence as confirmatory of Officer Snyder's identification evidence.

[6] We disagree. The trial judge properly used Ms. Robert's evidence to assist in connecting the appellant to the car which, the parties agreed, was the car that passed by Officer Snyder.

[7] The conviction appeal is dismissed.

Sentence Appeal

[8] The appellant also appeals his four year sentence.

[9] The appellant has been convicted of many driving offences in the past, including the same offence of driving while disqualified. His sentence for his most recent offence in this category was three years. Hence the four year sentence imposed by the trial judge cannot be said to be unfit or unreasonable.

[10] The sentence appeal is dismissed.