R. v. Ruttan (D.E.), 2009 ABQB 71

• Judge: Yamauchi, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: January 15, 2009
• Citations: 2009 ABQB 71;(2009), 466 A.R. 181 (QB)

R. v. Ruttan (D.E.) (2009), 466 A.R. 181 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2009] A.R. TBEd. FE.028

Her Majesty The Queen (respondent) v. Dale Edward Ruttan (appellant)

(070196977S1; 2009 ABQB 71)

Indexed As: R. v. Ruttan (D.E.)

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Peace River

Yamauchi, J.

February 2, 2009.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of driving a motor vehicle while having an excessive blood-alcohol content. He appealed, submitting that his s. 10(b) Charter right to counsel was denied.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the appeal.

Civil Rights - Topic 4605

Right to counsel - General - Denial of - Due to lack of time or opportunity - A detained accused, not resident in the area, was advised of his s. 10(b) Charter right to counsel - He was placed in a telephone room with a phone book, a phone and a Legal Aid poster - The accused was unable to contact his lawyer and asked to call another one, but advised that without his reading glasses he could not read the phone book's small print - The officer offered assistance, but declined to choose a lawyer for the accused - The officer had the accused point to a lawyer he wished to call - The officer wrote down the phone number in large writing - The accused encountered a busy signal - The officer did not read off the names of all of the lawyers listed, did not advise the accused how to contact directory assistance and did not ask whether he needed to call long distance - Another officer took over - The accused immediately advised him that he wished to contact Legal Aid - He was directed to the large print phone number on the poster and spoke to someone for two minutes - When asked if he was satisfied with the advice, the accused responded that he was - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench affirmed that the accused's right to counsel was not denied - The accused was provided a reasonable opportunity to contact counsel of his choice - The officer's assistance was responsive to the accused's visual needs - The failure of the accused to name his lawyer or ask for assistance in making a long distance call, if he so desired, constituted a lack of reasonable diligence in exercising his right to counsel - In these circumstances, the officer was not required to read the listing of lawyers' names or retrieve the accused's glasses - If the accused needed further assistance, which he did not indicate, reasonable diligence obligated him to so advise the officer - What the officer did was measured against the known circumstances, not hidden facts.

Civil Rights - Topic 4609.1

Right to counsel - General - Duty of police investigators (incl. undercover officers) - [See Civil Rights - Topic 4605 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 4620.4

Right to counsel - General - Duty of accused to act diligently - [See Civil Rights - Topic 4605 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Luong (G.V.) (2000), 271 A.R. 368; 234 W.A.C. 368; 149 C.C.C.(3d) 571 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Rath, [2003] A.J. No. 1659 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 8].

Interfaith Community Organization v. Honeywell International Inc. (2005), 399 F.3d 248 (3rd Cir.), refd to. [para. 11].

Housen v. Nikolaisen et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235; 286 N.R. 1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Snider (D.W.) (2002), 325 A.R. 261; 2002 CarswellAlta 558 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Top (1989), 95 A.R. 195; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 493 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Manninen, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 1233; 76 N.R. 198; 21 O.A.C. 192, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Tremblay, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 435; 79 N.R. 153; 25 O.A.C. 93, dist. [para. 16].

R. v. Brydges, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 190; 103 N.R. 282; 104 A.R. 124, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Akot (M.M.) (2000), 268 A.R. 145 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Campbell (J.D.) (2003), 235 Sask.R. 127 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Laboucane (D.R.) (1994), 155 A.R. 249; 73 W.A.C. 249 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Hogan (1979), 32 N.S.R.(2d) 331; 54 A.P.R. 331; 48 C.C.C.(2d) 149 (C.A.), dist. [para. 21].

R. v. McLinden (L.A.), [2004] A.R. Uned. 132; 2004 ABPC 7, dist. [para. 22].

R. v. Liew (K.L.) (1998), 212 A.R. 381; 168 W.A.C. 381; 124 C.C.C.(3d) 202 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Olson (J.A.) (2008), 452 A.R. 259; 2008 ABPC 160, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Cruz (J.M.) (2008), 455 A.R. 10; 2008 ABPC 155, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Niedergesaess (M.A.) (2008), 443 A.R. 109; 2008 ABQB 460, affd. (2008), 440 A.R. 373; 438 W.A.C. 373; 2008 ABCA 343, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. MacLaren (H.K.) (2001), 212 Sask.R. 204; 2001 SKQB 493, refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Landolt (R.J.) (2007), 295 Sask.R. 99 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Casselman (S.), [2005] O.T.C. 1084 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Blackett (B.K.), [2006] O.T.C. 689; 36 M.V.R.(5th) 223 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Littleford (H.) (2001), 147 O.A.C. 123; 86 C.R.R.(2d) 148; 15 M.V.R.(4th) 191 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Kumarasamy (K.), [2002] O.T.C. 83 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Morrissey (R.J.) (1995), 80 O.A.C. 161; 97 C.C.C.(3d) 193 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Counsel:

Cameron Jose (Alberta Justice), for the respondent/Crown;

David R. Cunningham (Beresh Cunningham), for the appellant/accused.

This appeal was heard on January 15, 2009, before Yamauchi, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Peace River, who delivered the following judgment on February 2, 2009.