Ontario Court of Justice

Date: 2019-05-10

Court File No.: Newmarket 4961-999-00-9805733Z

Between:

Min Zheng Appellant

— AND —

The Regional Municipality of York Respondent

Provincial Offence Appeal

Heard: May 10, 2019

Released: May 10, 2019

Counsel:

• Ms. J. Gallin, counsel for the Respondent
• Mr. M. Zheng, Appellant appearing on his own behalf

Decision

KENKEL J.:

[1] Mr. Zheng was convicted at trial of disobeying a stop sign contrary to s 136(1) of the Highway Traffic Act RSO 1990 c H-8.

[2] Findings of fact at trial are entitled to deference on appeal – R v D'Onofrio 2013 ONCA 145. This court may only interfere where the finding of the Justice of the Peace was unreasonable or was not supported by the evidence – R v Burns, [1994] S.C.J. No. 30.

[3] The appellant's evidence that he stopped a metre or two behind the stop line was contradicted by the evidence of the officer and by the in-car-camera (ICC) video evidence. The video was played several times and the court found the officer's testimony and the ICC video showed Mr. Zheng slowed but did not stop at the stop sign. If Mr. Zheng stopped further than 2 metres from the stop line (which was not his evidence) that still would not comply with the requirement of s 136(1) to come to a full stop at the marked line – R v Patterson [2015] OJ No 1045 (CJ).

[4] Mr. Zheng submitted that the officer is mistaken and could not see the intersection as he described. The issue of a view obstructed by trees or vehicles was considered at trial. The court found that the officer's testimony that he had an unobstructed view was credible given his position and the ICC video from his vehicle. That finding was reasonably available on the evidence and logical given that the officer set up at that location specifically to monitor that intersection.

[5] The Justice of the Peace considered the evidence of both parties and applied the appropriate legal test. The appellant disagrees with the findings of fact but they were reasonable and supported by the evidence.

[6] The appeal is dismissed.

Released: May 10, 2019

Justice Joseph F. Kenkel