Court of Appeal for Ontario

Date: 2019-10-29 Docket: C64458

Judges: Fairburn, Harvison Young and Thorburn JJ.A.

Between

Her Majesty the Queen Respondent

and

Sami Mediouni Appellant

Counsel

Ingrid Grant, for the appellant

Cindy Afonso, for the respondent

Heard: October 28, 2019

Background

On appeal from the conviction entered by Justice Deena Baltman of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting with a jury, on August 4, 2017, and from the sentence imposed on October 26, 2017, with reasons reported at 2017 ONSC 6365.

Appeal Book Endorsement

Conviction Appeal

[1] The appellant was convicted of conspiracy to export cocaine and was sentenced to five and a half years. The conviction appeal rests on a suggestion that the trial judge erred in how she instructed the jury on the element of conspiracy involving the formation of an agreement. That instruction involved telling the jury that the appellant agreed that there was an agreement and so the jury had to focus upon what the agreement was for. The appellant maintained that the agreement was to steal money and not to export cocaine.

[2] The appellant argues that the trial judge's instruction on the fact that an agreement had formed would have been confusing to the jury and caused them to miss two key points: (a) what the agreement was for; and (b) whether any possible discussions about exporting cocaine went beyond mere negotiations and actually crystallized in an agreement to export cocaine.

[3] The appellant says that the jury questions highlight the jury's confusion on these points.

[4] We disagree.

[5] Read as a whole, the jury charge clearly left the elements of conspiracy for the jury's consideration, including what constitutes an agreement and that the agreement had to be to export cocaine. Taken in context, the jury was well equipped to understand how to approach the question of whether there was an agreement to export cocaine and how to consider the evidence against that legal framework.

Sentence Appeal

[6] For substantially the reasons given by the trial judge, we do not agree that the sentence is unfit. It was well within the range. The trial judge specifically took into account the duration of the conspiracy.

[7] The conviction appeal is dismissed. Leave to appeal against sentence is granted but the appeal is dismissed.