r v. R., 2011 NBCA 11

COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW BRUNSWICK 130-10-CA JASON CHARLES BIGGAR APPELLANT JASON CHARLES BIGGAR APPELANT - and - - et - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN RESPONDENT SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE INTIMÉE Biggar v. R., 2011 NBCA 11 Biggar c.

R., 2011 NBCA 11 CORAM: The Honourable Justice Turnbull The Honourable Justice Deschênes The Honourable Justice Bell CORAM : L’honorable juge Turnbull L’honorable juge Deschênes L’honorable juge Bell Appeal from a decision of the Provincial Court: September 28, 2010 Appel d’une décision de la Cour provinciale : Le 28 septembre 2010 History of Case: Historique de la cause : Decision under appeal: Unreported Décision frappée d’appel : Inédite Preliminary or incidental proceedings: N/A Procédures préliminaires ou accessoires : S.O.

Appeal heard: January 11, 2011 Appel entendu : Le 11 janvier 2011 Judgment rendered: February 10, 2011 Jugement rendu : Le 10 février 2011

Counsel at hearing: For the appellant: Jason Charles Biggar appeared in person For the respondent: Lindsay J. Schriver Avocats à l’audience : Pour l’appelant : Jason Charles Biggar a comparu en personne Pour l’intimée : Lindsay J. Schriver THE COURT The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. LA COUR La demande en autorisation d’appel est rejetée. The following is the judgment delivered by THE COURT [ 1 ] On September 13, 2010, a judge of the Provincial Court convicted the appellant on charges of assault with a weapon ( s. 267 (

a) of the Criminal Code ) and breach of probation ( s. 733.1(1) ). The appellant requests leave to appeal the convictions, but takes no issue with the sentence imposed in the event the convictions stand. The proposed appeal raises questions of fact, for which leave is required pursuant to s. 675(1)( a )(ii). [ 2 ] The appellant effectively requests this Court retry the case against him. As explained in Blizzard v. R. , 2011 NBCA 4 , that is not our function: It is not the function of the Court of Appeal to retry the case.

The judge determined what evidence was credible and the weight to be attributed to the evidence. That was her role. Having made findings of fact, the judge applied the governing principles of law and articulated reasons for the conclusions she then reached. There is no error in this approach. [para. 5] [ 3 ] In the circumstances, the application for leave to appeal is dismissed. ________________________________ WALLACE S. TURNBULL, J.A. ________________________________ ALEXANDRE DESCHÊNES, J.A.

________________________________ B. RICHARD BELL, J.A.