The accused applied for a Rowbotham order seeking state-funded counsel after Legal Aid refused to approve a change of solicitor following a breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship shortly before trial.
The court considered whether the accused had been denied Legal Aid through his own conduct, whether he had exhausted available means to retain private counsel, and whether counsel was necessary for a fair trial.
The court found the accused had limited financial means, had attempted to retain counsel, and was not solely responsible for the breakdown with prior counsel.
Given the seriousness of the drug trafficking charges, the likelihood of imprisonment upon conviction, and the legal and evidentiary complexity including Charter issues and a jury trial, representation by counsel was necessary.
A conditional stay of proceedings was therefore granted until state-funded counsel is provided.