R. v. Downey (D.R.), (2015) 435 N.B.R.(2d) 315 (CA)

• Judge: Larlee, Quigg and Baird, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (New Brunswick)
• Case Date: February 11, 2015
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: (2015), 435 N.B.R.(2d) 315 (CA);2015 NBCA 25

R. v. Downey (D.R.) (2015), 435 N.B.R.(2d) 315 (CA);

    435 R.N.-B.(2e) 315; 1134 A.P.R. 315

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2015] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. AP.016

Renvoi temp.: [2015] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. AP.016

Daniel Ray Downey (appellant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent)

(42-14-CA; 2015 NBCA 25)

Indexed As: R. v. Downey (D.R.)

Répertorié: R. v. Downey (D.R.)

New Brunswick Court of Appeal

Larlee, Quigg and Baird, JJ.A.

April 23, 2015.

Summary:

Résumé:

The accused was charged with wilfully attempting to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice in a judicial proceeding by fabricating evidence.

The New Brunswick Provincial Court, in a decision reported at 415 N.B.R.(2d) 22; 1076 A.P.R. 22, found the accused guilty. The accused appealed.

The New Brunswick Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Civil Rights - Topic 3264

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - The accused appealed his conviction for wilfully attempting to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice, asserting that, inter alia, (1) the institutional delay contravened his s. 11(b) Charter rights and the proceedings should be stayed, and (2) the failure to provide him with state-funded counsel contravened his s. 7 rights - The New Brunswick Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - Both arguments were raised for the first time on appeal and there were no decisions to review - Even if the s. 11(b) argument had been raised, there was no evidence to suggest that the accused was prejudiced or that he did not have a fair trial as a result of several adjournments granted at the request of both parties - As for the s. 7 argument, it was unlikely that state-funded counsel would have been granted even if it had been requested at trial - The case was neither complex nor lengthy - The accused was afforded every opportunity to present his evidence, and there was nothing to suggest he did not have a fair hearing - Throughout, the trial judge was considerate and respectful, and provided the accused with evidentiary explanations from time to time without giving him advice per se - There was sufficient evidence to enable a proper adjudication of the issues - With respect to both arguments, there were three prerequisites that had to be satisfied to permit raising an issue (including a Charter challenge) for the first time on appeal: (1) a sufficient evidentiary record to resolve the issue had to be present; (2) the failure to raise the issue at trial must not have been for tactical reasons; and (3) no miscarriage of justice could result from the refusal - These criteria militated against the accused's arguments - See paragraphs 3 to 12.

Civil Rights - Topic 3270

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - Evidence of prejudice and causes of delay - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3264 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 4633

Right to counsel - Appointment of counsel by the court or the state - Where party impecunious - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3264 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 4633.1

Right to counsel - Appointment of counsel by the court or the state - Where party unable to represent self - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3264 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8584

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Practice - Time for raising Charter issues - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3264 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4853

Appeals - Indictable offences - Grounds of appeal - Grounds raised for the first time on appeal - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3264 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 4853

Appels - Actes criminels - Motifs d'appel - Motifs soulevés pour la première fois en appel - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 4853 ].

Droits et libertés - Cote 3264

Procès - Application régulière de la loi, justice fondamentale et audiences équitables - Droit de l'accusé d'être jugé sans délai - Négation du droit - [Voir Civil Rights - Topic 3264 ].

Droits et libertés - Cote 3270

Procès - Application régulière de la loi, justice fondamentale et audiences équitables - Droit de l'accusé d'être jugé sans délai - Preuve du préjudice et causes du retard - [Voir Civil Rights - Topic 3270 ].

Droits et libertés - Cote 4633

Droit à l'assistance d'un avocat - Désignation d'un avocat par le tribunal ou l'État - Prévenu impécunieux - [Voir Civil Rights - Topic 4633 ].

Droits et libertés - Cote 4633.1

Droit à l'assistance d'un avocat - Désignation d'un avocat par le tribunal ou l'État - Lorsque la partie ne peut se représenter elle-même - [Voir Civil Rights - Topic 4633.1 ].

Droits et libertés - Cote 8584

Charte canadienne des droits et libertés - Procédure - À quel moment invoquer la Charte - [Voir Civil Rights - Topic 8584 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Askov, Hussey, Melo and Gugliotta, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1199; 113 N.R. 241; 42 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 3].

R. v. Morin, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771; 134 N.R. 321; 53 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 4].

R. v. Rowbotham et al. (1988), 25 O.A.C. 321 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. LeBlanc (D.) (2005), 279 N.B.R.(2d) 121; 732 A.P.R. 121; 193 C.C.C.(3d) 387; 2005 NBCA 6, leave to appeal denied [2011] S.C.C.A. No. 214, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Osborne (S.) (2003), 268 N.B.R.(2d) 184; 704 A.P.R. 184; 2003 NBCA 86, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Koumoutsidis (P.) (2006), 297 N.B.R.(2d) 186; 771 A.P.R. 186; 2006 NBCA 32, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Brown (A.R.R.), [1993] 2 S.C.R. 918; 155 N.R. 225; 141 A.R. 163; 46 W.A.C. 163, refd to. [para. 12].

Brooks v. Fredericton Police Force et al. (2015), 433 N.B.R.(2d) 371; 1130 A.P.R. 371; 2015 NBCA 18, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Langlais (M.) (2008), 328 N.B.R.(2d) 201; 841 A.P.R. 201; 2008 NBCA 20, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Black (D.M.) (2010), 360 N.B.R.(2d) 132; 930 A.P.R. 132; 2010 NBCA 36, leave to appeal refused (2011), 416 N.R. 399 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Black (D.M.) (2010), 363 N.B.R.(2d) 316; 936 A.P.R. 316; 2010 NBCA 65, leave to appeal refused (2011), 422 N.R. 387 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Hachey (T.) (2012), 383 N.B.R.(2d) 197; 991 A.P.R. 197; 2012 NBCA 14, refd to. [para. 12].

C.M.H. v. J.R.H. (2012), 393 N.B.R.(2d) 154; 1017 A.P.R. 154; 2012 NBCA 71, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Downey (D.R.) (2012), 392 N.B.R.(2d) 238; 1016 A.P.R. 238; 2012 NBCA 78, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. R.D.S., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484; 218 N.R. 1; 161 N.S.R.(2d) 241; 477 A.P.R. 241, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. S.G.G., [1997] 2 S.C.R. 716; 214 N.R. 161; 94 B.C.A.C. 81; 152 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Lempen (J.A.) (2008), 338 N.B.R.(2d) 377; 866 A.P.R. 377; 2008 NBCA 86, refd to. [para. 15].

Housen v. Nikolaisen et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235; 286 N.R. 1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1; 2002 SCC 33, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Gillis (R.J.) (2014), 426 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 1110 A.P.R. 1; 2014 NBCA 58, leave to appeal denied [2014] S.C.C.A. No. 496, refd to. [para. 17].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Hill, S.C., Tanovich, D.M., and Strezos, L.P., McWilliams' Canadian Criminal Evidence (5th Ed. 2013), ch. 24, p. 19 [para. 15].

Counsel:

Avocats:

Daniel Ray Downey, appeared in person;

Kathryn A. Gregory, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on February 11, 2015, by Larlee, Quigg and Baird, JJ.A., of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal. Baird, J.A., delivered the following reasons for judgment for the court, in both official languages, on April 23, 2015.