A well-known local athlete has failed in his bid to overturn his conviction for punching an opponent in the face during a highly competitive recreational soccer league match five years ago.
In a decision released this week, the province's top court dismissed Joshua Gauthier's appeal of his 2022 aggravated assault conviction for his actions on a summer night in 2019.
The Ontario Court of Appeal also upheld the penalty imposed by Superior Court Justice Edward Gareau.
Gauthier struck Adam Erickson, badly injuring him, during a July 8, 2019 game at Strathclair Park.
His blow fractured the victim's right orbital bone, resulting in a laceration above his right eye that required 18 stitches.
He was charged with aggravated assault and Gareau found him guilty of the charge in November following a four-day trial earlier in the year.
The 41-year-old's conviction appeal was based on three arguments.
Gareau erred by not accepting a defence of reflex action, Gauthier's counsel argued.
The two men were challenging each other for the ball, and Gauthier's punch came immediately after Erickson kicked him in the back of the leg and pushed him.
Rejecting this argument, the appeal court said the strike may have been sudden "but there was nothing involuntary about it."
Testimony of all the witnesses indicated Gauthier turned around and punched Erickson.
Based on the totality of the evidence, Gareau reasonably concluded the strike to the victim's face wasn't reflexive — it was intentional and done in retaliation, the higher court said.
The three-member panel also rejected Gauthier's submission that the trial judge should have found he acted in self defence.
Erickson's actions shouldn't have provoked such an unusual and violent response, it said.
The judge found there was no air of reality that he punched the victim in self-defence and Gauthier's response wasn't reasonable in the circumstances.
Gauthier is taller and heavier than Erickson, and had other options, such as kicking the ball out of bounds to stop play, calling for a substitute or urging the referee to call an infraction, Gareau said.
The appeal court also rejected the defence's third argument: that Erickson's injuries should have been found to be bodily harm and not wounding (one of the components of aggravated assault).
There is no question these injuries constituted wounding, it said. "A broken bone and lacerations requiring 18 stitches clearly meet the definition."
Gauthier also was seeking a reduction of his 12-month house arrest sentence to one year probation.
The appeal court noted his lawyer had pointed out his lack of a prior criminal record, the nearly four years he spent on bail, his steady employment, family role and community involvement.
Acknowledging all of Gauthier's attributes, it indicated that Gareau had recognised many mitigating factors when he imposed the sentence.
The trial judge's sentence "was entirely fair" given the stated goal of general deterrence, the higher court concluded, and "we see no error in his reasons."