Court of Appeal for Ontario

Date: 20211027 Docket: C65319

Fairburn A.C.J.O., Rouleau and Huscroft JJ.A.

Between

Her Majesty the Queen Respondent

and

Saad Hassan Appellant

Counsel: Nicholas A. Xynnis, for the appellant Craig Harper, for the respondent

Heard and released orally: October 26, 2021 by video conference

On appeal from the convictions entered by Justice Grant R. Dow of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting with a jury, dated May 25, 2017.

Reasons for Decision

[1] This is an appeal from conviction for one count of robbery, one count of attempted robbery, two counts of using an imitation firearm while committing robbery, and one count of uttering a threat. The offences involve the robbery of two women. When the appellant was located by the police in the area of the crimes not long after they occurred, the wallet of one woman and the imitation firearm used in the robberies were located in his car.

[2] The appellant argues that the jury charge was inadequate in the sense that it:

1. Failed to relate the evidence to the issues; and
2. Failed to deal with the exculpatory evidence in the charge.

[3] We disagree. This was a focused and straightforward trial involving only three days of evidence, much of which was not in dispute.

[4] The jury’s attention was properly focused on the live issues. The charge followed a two-step process. First, the trial judge outlined the legal issues the jury had to consider. No objection is taken to how those legal issues were expressed.

[5] Second, the trial judge related the evidence to those issues. While the evidentiary review was not exhaustive in nature, it need not be, particularly in the context of a very short trial where the evidence is fresh in the minds of jurors and closing arguments have just been made.

[6] The adequacy of the charge in this case is reflected in the absence of any objection. Moreover, the absence of objection exists in the face of having pre-vetted the charge with counsel where no concerns were expressed, specifically as they relate to the issues now raised on appeal.

[7] We are satisfied that in this straightforward, three-day jury trial, the jury was well equipped to decide the issues that needed to be decided.

[8] The appeal is dismissed.

“Fairburn A.C.J.O.”

“Paul Rouleau J.A.”

“Grant Huscroft J.A.”