Ineffective Counsel (Cases): Difference between revisions

From Criminal Law Notebook
m Text replacement - "\'\'R v ([a-zA-Z]+)\'\'\,<br> \[http:\/\/canlii.ca\/t\/([a-z0-9]+) ([0-9]+ [A-Z]+ [0-9]+)\] \([a-zA-Z]+\)\{" to "{{CanLIIR-S|$1|$2|$3 (CanLII)}}{"
m Text replacement - "\'\'R v ([a-zA-Z]+)\'\'<br> \[http:\/\/canlii.ca\/t\/([a-zA-Z0-9_]+) ([1-2][0-9]+ [A-Z]+ [0-9]+)\] \(CanLII\)\{" to "{{CanLIIR-S|$1|$2|$3 (CanLII)}}{"
Line 14: Line 14:
{{SCaseResult|''R v Eroma'',<br>[http://canlii.ca/t/fws1v 2013 ONCA 194] (CanLII){{TheCourtONCA}} | granted | lawyer did not permit accused to chose whether to testify. }}
{{SCaseResult|''R v Eroma'',<br>[http://canlii.ca/t/fws1v 2013 ONCA 194] (CanLII){{TheCourtONCA}} | granted | lawyer did not permit accused to chose whether to testify. }}


{{SCaseResult|''R v Travis''<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/ftj3x 2012 ABQB 629] (CanLII){{perABQB| Yamauchi J}} | denied | failed to call witnesses or request further disclosure}}
{{SCaseResult|{{CanLIIR-S|Travis|ftj3x|2012 ABQB 629 (CanLII)}}{{perABQB| Yamauchi J}} | denied | failed to call witnesses or request further disclosure}}


{{SCaseResult|''R v Aulakh''<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/fsbm1 2012 BCCA 340] (CanLII){{perBCCA|D Smith JA}} | denied |allege defence failed on a number of points}}
{{SCaseResult|{{CanLIIR-S|Aulakh|fsbm1|2012 BCCA 340 (CanLII)}}{{perBCCA|D Smith JA}} | denied |allege defence failed on a number of points}}


{{SCaseResult|R v G.M.<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/fs3xc 2012 NLCA 47] (CanLII){{perNLCA|Welsh JA}}| granted | defence failed to call evidence attacking credibility of crown witness }}
{{SCaseResult|R v G.M.<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/fs3xc 2012 NLCA 47] (CanLII){{perNLCA|Welsh JA}}| granted | defence failed to call evidence attacking credibility of crown witness }}


{{SCaseResult|''R v Downing''<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/frbq8 2012 ABQB 287] (CanLII){{perABQB| Nielsen J}} | denied | }}
{{SCaseResult|{{CanLIIR-S|Downing|frbq8|2012 ABQB 287 (CanLII)}}{{perABQB| Nielsen J}} | denied | }}


{{SCaseResult|''R v Ross''<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/frj5p 2012 NSCA 56] (CanLII){{perNSCA|Bryson JA}} | granted | trial counsel did not call any evidence or cross-examine on sexual interference case where defence was an honest mistaken belief of age}}
{{SCaseResult|{{CanLIIR-S|Ross|frj5p|2012 NSCA 56 (CanLII)}}{{perNSCA|Bryson JA}} | granted | trial counsel did not call any evidence or cross-examine on sexual interference case where defence was an honest mistaken belief of age}}


{{SCaseResult|R v O'Keefe (No. 2)<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/frczp 2012 NLCA 25] (CanLII){{perNLCA|Harrington JA}}| denied | claimed counsel failed to call witnesses, raise charter issues, make requested election}}
{{SCaseResult|R v O'Keefe (No. 2)<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/frczp 2012 NLCA 25] (CanLII){{perNLCA|Harrington JA}}| denied | claimed counsel failed to call witnesses, raise charter issues, make requested election}}


{{SCaseResult|''R v Fraser''<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/fmdck 2011 NSCA 70] (CanLII){{perNSCA|Saunders JA}}| granted | new trial ordered}}
{{SCaseResult|{{CanLIIR-S|Fraser|fmdck|2011 NSCA 70 (CanLII)}}{{perNSCA|Saunders JA}}| granted | new trial ordered}}


{{SCaseResult|''R v Hobbs''<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/2b5sw 2010 NSCA 53] (CanLII){{perNSCA|Saunders JA}} | denied |}}
{{SCaseResult|{{CanLIIR-S|Hobbs|2b5sw|2010 NSCA 53 (CanLII)}}{{perNSCA|Saunders JA}} | denied |}}


{{SCaseResult|R v MB<br>  [http://canlii.ca/t/245hl 2009 ONCA 524] (CanLII){{perONCA| Cronk and Armstrong JJA}} | granted | new trial ordered}}
{{SCaseResult|R v MB<br>  [http://canlii.ca/t/245hl 2009 ONCA 524] (CanLII){{perONCA| Cronk and Armstrong JJA}} | granted | new trial ordered}}
Line 34: Line 34:
{{SCaseResult|R v TP<br> [2002] OJ No 2142 (Ont. C.A.), [http://canlii.ca/t/1vbfd 2002 ONCA 49360] (CanLII){{perONCA|Simmons JA}}| |}}
{{SCaseResult|R v TP<br> [2002] OJ No 2142 (Ont. C.A.), [http://canlii.ca/t/1vbfd 2002 ONCA 49360] (CanLII){{perONCA|Simmons JA}}| |}}


{{SCaseResult|''R v Gardiner''<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/2b618 2010 NBCA 46] (CanLII){{perNBCA|Richard JA}}| granted | counsel failed to apply Browne v Dunn rule in examination, so new trial ordered.}}
{{SCaseResult|{{CanLIIR-S|Gardiner|2b618|2010 NBCA 46 (CanLII)}}{{perNBCA|Richard JA}}| granted | counsel failed to apply Browne v Dunn rule in examination, so new trial ordered.}}


{{SCaseEnd}}
{{SCaseEnd}}

Revision as of 08:46, 1 February 2021

Ineffective Counsel

See also: Ineffective Counsel
Case Name Result Summary
R v Benham, 2013 BCCA 276 (CanLII), per Frankel JA denied failure to advise the accused to testify, failure to call certain witnesses
R v Lovas, 2013 ONSC 1932 (CanLII), per Durno J denied
R v Eroma,
2013 ONCA 194 (CanLII), per curiam
granted lawyer did not permit accused to chose whether to testify.
R v Travis, 2012 ABQB 629 (CanLII), per Yamauchi J denied failed to call witnesses or request further disclosure
R v Aulakh, 2012 BCCA 340 (CanLII), per D Smith JA denied allege defence failed on a number of points
R v G.M.
2012 NLCA 47 (CanLII), per Welsh JA
granted defence failed to call evidence attacking credibility of crown witness
R v Downing, 2012 ABQB 287 (CanLII), per Nielsen J denied
R v Ross, 2012 NSCA 56 (CanLII), per Bryson JA granted trial counsel did not call any evidence or cross-examine on sexual interference case where defence was an honest mistaken belief of age
R v O'Keefe (No. 2)
2012 NLCA 25 (CanLII), per Harrington JA
denied claimed counsel failed to call witnesses, raise charter issues, make requested election
R v Fraser, 2011 NSCA 70 (CanLII), per Saunders JA granted new trial ordered
R v Hobbs, 2010 NSCA 53 (CanLII), per Saunders JA denied
R v MB
2009 ONCA 524 (CanLII), per Cronk and Armstrong JJA
granted new trial ordered
R v TP
[2002] OJ No 2142 (Ont. C.A.), 2002 ONCA 49360 (CanLII), per Simmons JA
R v Gardiner, 2010 NBCA 46 (CanLII), per Richard JA granted counsel failed to apply Browne v Dunn rule in examination, so new trial ordered.