Summary conviction appeal from a conviction entered after a guilty plea to operating a conveyance with a blood alcohol concentration over 80 mg.
The appellant argued that the trial judge wrongly refused a day-of-trial adjournment to retain counsel and that the plea was uninformed because he did not understand the immigration consequences of conviction.
The court held that the trial judge properly exercised discretion in refusing the adjournment, given the age of the charges, the absence of diligence in retaining counsel, and the readiness of the witnesses and Crown to proceed.
The court further held that the appellant was sufficiently aware that a criminal conviction could carry serious immigration consequences, and in any event failed to establish credible subjective prejudice showing a reasonable possibility that he would have proceeded differently.
