2023 QCCA 1186, 2023 QCCA 1186

Pietraroia c. R. 2023 QCCA 1186 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No.: 500-10-008074-237 ( 500-36-010235-22 7), (500-01-206618-206) MINUTES OF HEARING DATE: September 20, 2023 THE HONOURABLE STÉPHANE SANSFAÇON, J.A. APPLICANT Violanda Pietraroia Unrepresented RESPONDENT COUNSEL HIS MAJESTY THE KING Mtre BRUNO MÉNARD ( Directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales ) DESCRIPTION: Motion for leave to appeal from a conviction on a ground that involves questions of law (

Section 839 of the Criminal Code ) Clerk at the hearing : Ariane Simard-Trudel Courtroom: RC-18 HEARING 9:30 Commencement of the hearing. Identification of the parties. 9:32 Submissions by Mrs. Pietraroia. 9:36 Discussion between the judge and Mrs. Pietraroia. 9:45 Mrs. Pietraroia resumes her submissions.

9:47 Submissions by Mtre Ménard. 9:55 Reply by Mrs. Pietraroia. 9:56 BY THE JUDGE : Judgment will be rendered this day on the minutes of hearing– see page 3. Conclusion of the hearing. Ariane Simard-Trudel, Clerk at the hearing JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The applicant seeks leave to appeal from the

summary conviction appeal judgment rendered by the Superior Court, which dismissed her appeal from a judgment of the Court of Québec, dated March 31, 2022, in which she was found guilty of assault with a weapon against her brother, Nicola Pietraroia. [ 2 ] As my colleague, Healy, J.A., stated in Vorias v. R. : [1] Leave to appeal from a

summary-conviction appeal in the Superior Court may be granted under

section 839 of the Criminal Code only on a question of law and only sparingly. Such a question must be sufficiently important and involve exceptional circumstances that compel the intervention of the court. These factors were further developed in R.R. : [27] The requirement that the applicant obtain leave to appeal in s. 839 provides the mechanism whereby this court can control its

summary conviction appeal docket. Access to this court for a second appeal should be limited to those cases in which the applicant can demonstrate some exceptional circumstance justifying a further appeal. [ … ] [37] In

summary , leave to appeal pursuant to s. 839 should be granted sparingly. There is no single litmus test that can identify all cases in which leave should be granted. There are, however, two key variables — the significance of the legal issues raised to the general administration of criminal justice, and the merits of the proposed grounds of appeal. On the one hand, if the issues have significance to the administration of justice beyond the particular case, then leave to appeal may be granted even if the merits are not particularly strong, though the grounds must at least be arguable.

On the other hand, where the merits appear very strong, leave to appeal may be granted even if the issues have no general importance, especially if the convictions in issue are serious and the applicant is facing a significant deprivation of his or her liberty. [2] These principles have been adopted by appellate courts across Canada and they have been affirmed in this court with such frequency and consistency that a lengthy list of citations would be pointless. [1] [ 3 ] The applicant essentially reiterates the arguments that had failed in the Superior Court.

In effect, she asks the Court to redo the analysis undertaken at the first level of appeal and come to a different conclusion. [ 4 ] This file raises no legal issue that may have any significance to the administration of justice beyond the particular case at bar, nor does it raise any arguable ground of appeal or exceptional circumstance justifying that a second appeal be put before the Court .

Moreover, the applicant does not convince me that the second judge erred in his conclusion that she failed to demonstrate how the trial judge’s evidentiary ruling had any negative impact on the result or the fairness of her trial. FOR THESE REASONS , THE UNDERSIGNED: [ 5 ] DISMISSES the application for leave to appeal. STÉPHANE SANSFAÇON, J.A.