| 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 GM, 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 ONCA 49360 (CanLII), , [2002] OJ No 2142 (Ont. C.A.), 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.
|
