R. v. Roussin (B.), 2011 MBCA 27

Citation: R. v. Roussin (B.), 2011 MBCA 27 Date: 20110303 Dockets: AR 10-30-07352; AR 10-30-07353 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ) B. Roussin ) on his own behalf Respondent ) ) C. A.

Vanderhooft ) for the Respondent- and - ) ) ) Chambers motions heard andBJARNE ROUSSIN ) Decision pronounced: ) March 3, 2011 (Accused) Applicant ) BEARD J.A. 1 The applicant was convicted on December 12, 2009, following a trial by judge and jury, of 16 offences, including robberyand attempted robbery, and on March 11, 2009, following a trial by judge alone, of several offences, including dangerous driving. Intotal, he was sentenced to the equivalent of a period of incarceration of 13 years. He wishes to appeal his convictions and sentences, butwas refused Legal Aid to cover the cost of the appeals.

He has applied under s. 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (theCharter) for an order that counsel be appointed to represent him on his appeals. 2 The Crown, appropriately, took the following position: - that the application should have been brought under s. 684(1) of the Criminal Code rather than as a Charter application and that theCrown would not be opposed to the matter being continued as an application under s. 684(1); and - that the applicant appeared to have met the criteria for granting an order under s. 684(1), those being: (

i) that the applicant has raised arguable grounds of appeal; (ii) that, due to the complexity of the case and the arguments being advanced, the court cannot properly decide the case without thehelp of counsel; and (iii) that the applicant has been denied Legal Aid and cannot otherwise obtain legal assistance. (See R. v. Bernardo (1997), (ON CA), 121 C.C.C. (3d) 123 (Ont. C.A.), R. v.

Bicknell, 2009 MBCA 34, and R. v.B.L.B., 2004 MBCA 100, 190 Man.R. (2d) 6.) 3 The applicant was in agreement with the Crown’s position that his matter should be dealt with under s. 684(1). 4 Based on the information provided by the applicant in his affidavit and at the hearing, and taking into account the positionof the Crown, I find that the applicant has met all of the criteria for the granting of an order under s. 684(1) of the Criminal Code and is,therefore, entitled to have counsel appointed to represent him on his appeals. I am, therefore, granting the application, as amended.

Theapplicant should prepare an order as follows, have the order approved by the Crown and submit it to the court: - that the application be amended to include an application under s. 684(1) of the Criminal Code for the appointment of counsel torepresent the applicant on his appeals; and

- that counsel be appointed under s. 684(1) of the Criminal Code to represent the applicant on his appeals. 5 The applicant stated that he has discussed the question of legal representation on these appeals with Darren Sawchuk, the lawyer who acted for him at the trials, the last discussion being on the day before this matter was argued. At that time, Mr. Sawchuk confirmed to him that, if the applicant was successful in obtaining an order for the appointment of legal counsel, Mr. Sawchuk would be prepared to represent him on the appeals.

If that continues to be the case, the applicant can include a reference in the order to Mr. Sawchuk as the person being appointed. 6 There will be no order for costs. ___________________________ J.A.