R. v. Yellowhorn (B.), 2006 ABQB 307

• Judge: Langston, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: September 03, 2004
• Citations: 2006 ABQB 307;(2006), 399 A.R. 144 (QB)

R. v. Yellowhorn (B.) (2006), 399 A.R. 144 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2006] A.R. TBEd. MY.047

Bella Yellowhorn (appellant) v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta (respondent)

(040281958S1; 2006 ABQB 307)

Indexed As: R. v. Yellowhorn (B.)

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Lethbridge/Macleod

Langston, J.

April 19, 2006.

Summary:

The accused was charged with driving an uninsured motor vehicle, contrary to s. 71(1)(a) of the Motor Vehicle Administration Act.

The Alberta Provincial Court, in a decision reported at 352 A.R. 324, found the accused guilty. The accused appealed, raising a number of constitutional and jurisdictional issues in connection with her assertion that, as a member of the sovereign Blackfoot Nation, she was not subject to the laws of Canada or Alberta. The accused's application for Legal Aid funding for the appeal was denied. The accused applied for an order requiring the Crown to fund her counsel on the appeal or to pay her interim costs. She also sought to introduce fresh evidence on the appeal.

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

Civil Rights - Topic 4633

Right to counsel - Appointment of counsel by the court or the state - Where party impecunious - The accused was found guilty of driving an uninsured motor vehicle, contrary to s. 71(1)(a) of the Motor Vehicle Administration Act - The accused appealed, raising a number of constitutional and jurisdictional issues in connection with her assertion that, as a member of the sovereign Blackfoot Nation, she was not subject to the laws of Canada or Alberta - The accused's application for Legal Aid funding for the appeal was denied - The accused applied for an order requiring the Crown to fund her counsel - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application - The charge against the accused was not inherently complex or particularly serious and there was no merit to her appeal as all of the issues raised had been addressed by the courts in the past and rejected - See paragraphs 12 to 51.

Civil Rights - Topic 4638

Right to counsel - Appointment of counsel by the court or the state - By appeal court - [See Civil Rights - Topic 4633 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4591

Procedure - Costs - Against the Crown - The accused was found guilty of driving an uninsured motor vehicle, contrary to s. 71(1)(a) of the Motor Vehicle Administration Act - The accused appealed, raising a number of constitutional and jurisdictional issues in connection with her assertion that, as a member of the sovereign Blackfoot Nation, she was not subject to the laws of Canada or Alberta - The accused's application for Legal Aid funding for the appeal was denied - The accused applied for an order that the Crown pay her interim costs and cited the decision in B.C. v. Okanagan Indian Band (S.C.C.) - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application - The Okanagan case was a civil proceeding - This case was criminal or quasi-criminal and the costs principles applicable to the criminal context were appropriate - There had been no suggestion of misconduct by the Crown or that the charge was brought improperly - Therefore, an award of costs against the Crown was inappropriate, particularly at the interim stage - Even if the court had accepted that the principles set out in Okanagan applied in this case, it would decline to make an order for interim costs as the case failed to meet the criteria set forth by the Supreme Court of Canada - See paragraphs 52 to 61.

Practice - Topic 7883

Costs - Funding before judgment - When interim or advance costs available - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4591 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Rain (M.M.) (1998), 223 A.R. 359; 183 W.A.C. 359; 1998 ABCA 315, leave to appeal refused (1999), 239 N.R. 197; 250 A.R. 192; 213 W.A.C. 192 (S.C.C.), consd. [para. 13].

R. v. Cai - see R. v. Chan (M.K.) et al.

R. v. Chan (M.K.) et al. (2002), 317 A.R. 240; 284 W.A.C. 240; 170 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 2002 ABCA 299, leave to appeal refused (2004), 328 N.R. 400; 363 A.R. 199; 343 W.A.C. 199 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Robinson; R. v. Dolejs (1989), 100 A.R. 26 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Rowbotham et al. (1988), 25 O.A.C. 321; 41 C.C.C.(3d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Morehouse, 2005 ABCA 336, refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Sparrow, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1075; 111 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Williams (A.) et al., [1995] 2 C.N.L.R. 229; 52 B.C.A.C. 296; 86 W.A.C. 296 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1995), 193 N.R. 238; 70 B.C.A.C. 240; 115 W.A.C. 240 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 28].

Clark v. Minister of National Revenue, [1995] 2 C.T.C. 2962 (Tax. C.C.), affd. [1997] N.R. Uned. 57; 97 D.T.C. 5289 (F.C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1997), 223 N.R. 72 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 29].

Atlantic Yarns Inc., Re (1997), 192 N.B.R.(2d) 38; 489 A.P.R. 38 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Clark, [1997] B.C.J. No. 715 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 29].

Nowegijick v. Minister of National Revenue et al., [1983] 1 S.C.R. 29; 46 N.R. 41, refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Pamajewon (H.) et al., [1996] 2 S.C.R. 821; 199 N.R. 321; 92 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Van der Peet (D.M.), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 507; 200 N.R. 1; 80 B.C.A.C. 81; 130 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Chief (C.), [1997] 4 C.N.L.R. 212 (Sask. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Noltcho (S.G.) (2000), 196 Sask.R. 221; 2000 SKQB 223, refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Jones (D.-D.) (2000), 265 A.R. 96 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 38].

R. v. Crow Shoe (D.) (2004), 370 A.R. 213; 2004 ABPC 174, refd to. [para. 39].

R. v. Francis, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 1025; 85 N.R. 3; 85 N.B.R.(2d) 243; 217 A.P.R. 243, refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. Dick, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 309; 62 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. Twoyoungmen (1979), 16 A.R. 413 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 41].

R. v. Janvier (L.) et al. (2000), 262 A.R. 118; 2000 ABQB 187, refd to. [para. 42].

R. v. Littlechild (R.N.), [2002] A.R. Uned. 571; 55 W.C.B.(2d) 522; 2002 ABPC 163, refd to. [para. 43].

Cardinal v. Alberta (Attorney General), [1974] S.C.R. 695, refd to. [para. 45].

Four B Manufacturing Ltd. v. United Garment Workers of America, Labour Relations Board (Ont.) and Brant et al., [1980] 1 S.C.R. 1031; 30 N.R. 421, refd to. [para. 45].

R. v. Fournier (R.P.J.P.) et al., [2004] O.T.C. 260; 116 C.R.R.(2d) 253 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 50].

R. v. Bernardo (P.K.) (1997), 105 O.A.C. 244; 121 C.C.C.(3d) 123 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 51].

British Columbia (Minister of Forests) v. Okanagan Indian Band et al., [2003] 3 S.C.R. 371; 313 N.R. 84; 189 B.C.A.C. 161; 309 W.A.C. 161; 2003 SCC 71, refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Robinson (C.J.) (1999), 250 A.R. 201; 213 W.A.C. 201; 1999 ABCA 367, refd to. [para. 54].

Vukelich v. Mission Institution (Warden) (2005), 209 B.C.A.C. 39; 345 W.A.C. 39; 38 B.C.L.R.(4th) 132; 2005 BCCA 75, refd to. [para. 55].

Canadian Newspapers Co. v. Canada (Attorney General) (1986), 32 D.L.R.(4th) 292 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 59].

R. v. Palmer, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 759; 30 N.R. 181, refd to. [para. 64].

McMartin v. R., [1964] S.C.R. 484, refd to. [para. 65].

R. v. Loutfi (Y.M.) (1998), 212 A.R. 156; 168 W.A.C. 156; 1998 ABCA 59, refd to. [para. 67].

R. v. Lévesque (R.), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 487; 260 N.R. 165, refd to. [para. 68].

R. v. W.W. and I.W. (1995), 84 O.A.C. 241; 25 O.R.(3d) 161 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 74].

R. v. Bonin (1989), 47 C.C.C.(3d) 230 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 75].

Counsel:

Michael W. Swinwood, for the appellant;

Eric Brooks (Crown Prosecutor), for the respondent;

Angela Edgington and Sandra Folkins, for the respondent.

These applications were heard on September 3, 2004, before Langston, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Lethbridge/Macleod, who delivered the following memorandum of judgment on April 19, 2006.