The accused appealed a finding of not criminally responsible (NCR) made after conviction for dangerous driving, assault with a weapon, and taking a motor vehicle without consent.
The NCR hearing occurred unexpectedly when the accused appeared in court expecting to be sentenced, and newly appointed special duty counsel provided minimal challenge to psychiatric evidence supporting an NCR finding.
The Superior Court held the proceedings lacked procedural fairness and amounted to a miscarriage of justice under s. 686(1)(a)(iii) of the Criminal Code.
The court found the NCR application was effectively undefended and conducted prematurely.
The NCR finding was set aside and a new trial ordered limited to the issue of NCR.
