Wayne A. Rumble

The appellant, who was hearing impaired, was charged with sexual interference and sexual assault.

He consistently denied the allegations and wished to proceed to trial.

On the first day of trial, his counsel entered a plea of not guilty but informed the court the appellant would not dispute the allegations.

The Crown read the allegations, no evidence was called, and the trial judge entered a conviction without conducting a plea inquiry.

The Court of Appeal found that this procedure was the functional equivalent of a guilty plea and that the failure to conduct a plea inquiry, combined with trial counsel's pervasive lack of preparation and failure to follow instructions, resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

The appeal was allowed and a new trial ordered.

The appellant appealed his convictions for three counts of sexual interference, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel.

The Court of Appeal found that trial counsel failed to properly prepare for trial, including failing to review videotaped statements of the complainants and failing to interview two potential defence witnesses.

Concluding that these omissions prejudiced the appellant and deprived him of a fair trial, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the convictions, and stayed the charges as the Crown did not seek a new trial.