This ruling addresses a motion by defence counsel to withdraw from a criminal case after the accused, Juan Chua, pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance for the purpose of trafficking but subsequently failed to appear for sentencing.
The Crown took no position on the motion.
The court, applying the discretionary factors for counsel withdrawal outlined in *Cunningham v. Lilles*, denied the motion.
The judge emphasized that the accused was at a crucial stage of the proceedings (sentencing for a serious offence), counsel still held valid instructions, and denying withdrawal was in the best interest of the administration of justice, particularly given the potential for an in absentia sentencing and a lengthy custodial sentence without representation.