R. v. J.C.M., (2015) 356 N.S.R.(2d) 303 (CA)
|Court:||Nova Scotia Court of Appeal|
|Case Date:||February 26, 2015|
|Citations:||(2015), 356 N.S.R.(2d) 303 (CA);2015 NSCA 19|
R. v. J.C.M. (2015), 356 N.S.R.(2d) 303 (CA);
1126 A.P.R. 303
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite:  N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. MR.006
C.J.M. (appellant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent)
(CAC 416979; 2015 NSCA 19)
Indexed As: R. v. J.C.M.
Nova Scotia Court of Appeal
March 3, 2015.
The accused pled guilty to aggravated assault.
The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at (2013), 330 N.S.R.(2d) 23; 1046 A.P.R. 23, sentenced the accused to 12 years, less one-to-one credit for time served, for a go forward term of nine years, seven months and four days. The accused appealed his sentence. He moved for an order under s. 684 of the Criminal Code that the Attorney General appoint counsel.
The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, per Fichaud, J.A., dismissed the motion.
Editor's Note: Certain names in the following case have been initialized or the case otherwise edited to prevent the disclosure of identities where required by law, publication ban, Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.
Criminal Law - Topic 4974
Appeals - Indictable offences - Powers of Court of Appeal - Power to appoint counsel for accused - The accused pled guilty to aggravated assault - He was sentenced to 12 years, less one-to-one credit for time served, for a go forward term of nine years, seven months and four days - The accused appealed his sentence - He sought legal aid, but was declined - The accused moved for an order under s. 684 of the Criminal Code that the Attorney General appoint counsel - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, per Fichaud, J.A., dismissed the motion - The court accepted that the accused did not have the financial means to retain counsel - The appeal was also arguable - The issue on the appeal would be whether the sentence was unfit, or exceeded the range given the circumstances of the offence and the offender - It was not a complex point of law - Determination of the issue would involve a weighing of sentencing criteria and an appreciation of sentencing practice in similar cases - The court would have the record and the benefit of the transcribed sentencing submissions by the accused's counsel to the sentencing judge - The court would also have the benefit of the Crown's input - If the accused's submissions omitted an important point of argument, the court was confident that the Crown would bring that to the court's attention - The court was not satisfied that it was desirable in the interests of justice that the accused have state funded counsel for his appeal.
R. v. J.W. (2011), 307 N.S.R.(2d) 155; 975 A.P.R. 155; 2011 NSCA 76, refd to. [para. 15].
R. v. Fudge (C.) (2013), 338 N.S.R.(2d) 269; 1071 A.P.R. 269; 2013 NSCA 149, refd to. [para. 17].
Boucher v. The Queen,  S.C.R. 16, refd to. [para. 24].
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 684(1) [para. 14].
The appellant, on his own behalf;
Edward A. Gores, Q.C., for the Attorney General of Nova Scotia;
Mark Scott, for the respondent, Her Majesty the Queen.
This motion was heard in Chambers, in Halifax, N.S., on February 26, 2015, before Fichaud, J.A., of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, who delivered the following decision on March 3, 2015.
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP