Adam Lachance

The Crown requested an ex parte order appointing counsel for the complainant in respect of upcoming pretrial applications under s. 278.92 of the Criminal Code.

The trial judge declined to make the order ex parte, expressing discomfort with making an order impacting the accused's trial without notice.

The Crown was directed to bring a formal application on notice to the accused, the complainant, the Ministry of the Attorney General, and Legal Aid Ontario, and to be prepared to address whether the court has jurisdiction to make such an appointment.

This decision addresses multiple Charter issues arising from an impaired driving investigation, including voluntariness of statements, grounds and timing for an approved screening device (ASD) demand, and the right to counsel under sections 8, 9, and 10(b) of the Charter.

The court found the accused’s statements involuntary due to an inducement by police, but upheld the ASD demand as lawful with reasonable suspicion and no Charter breach in timing or delay in providing the right to counsel.

The accused was found to be the driver in care and control of the vehicle and impaired by alcohol beyond a reasonable doubt, resulting in convictions on both impaired operation and BAC ’80 plus’ charges.

The court sentenced R.B. to three years in custody after he pleaded guilty to sexual touching of a child under s. 151 of the Criminal Code.

The decision reviews the facts, the impact on the victim, the offender’s background, and the applicable law, including the Supreme Court’s guidance in R. v. Friesen on sentencing for sexual offences against children.

The court considered aggravating and mitigating factors, including the breach of trust, the victim’s age, and the offender’s health and plea.

The court imposed several ancillary orders, including DNA, SOIRA, and firearms prohibitions.