The appellant appealed his summary conviction for 'over 80', arguing the trial judge erred in dismissing his Charter applications under s. 10(b) and s. 11(b).
The appellant claimed his right to counsel was violated because police did not offer a Spanish interpreter, and that his trial was unreasonably delayed beyond the 18-month Jordan ceiling.
The Summary Conviction Appeal Court dismissed the appeal, finding no 'special circumstances' required police to offer an interpreter as the appellant communicated effectively in English.
The court also upheld the s. 11(b) ruling, agreeing that the delay was justified by exceptional circumstances, primarily the gross underestimation of trial time and the expanding defence witness list.
