Case information

Criminal law — Mistrial — Ineffective assistance of counsel — What legal framework applies to a mistrial application based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel — Whether the failure to ensure that an accused person consents to a change in their election to be tried by a judge and jury constitutes an error of law or a miscarriage of justice — If the right to elect mode of trial is a protected right that should be exercised by an accused person, when does the unilateral change of that election by trial counsel result in an error of law or miscarriage of justice — Where counsel brings a mistrial application based on ineffective assistance of counsel, should Canadian courts have regard to s. 686(1)(a)(ii) or (iii) of the Criminal Code — To what extent should the adjudication of ineffective assistance of counsel matters depend on supporting evidence from trial defence counsel — Whether appellate courts should consider miscarriage of justice issues de novo or on a palpable and overriding error standard — Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

(PUBLICATION BAN IN CASE)

The applicant was convicted of sexual assault in 2016 by a judge alone. Prior to sentencing he left the jurisdiction. He returned in 2022, obtained new counsel, and brought an application for a mistrial based on ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The application for a mistrial was dismissed. His subsequent appeal was also dismissed.