r v. R., 2010 NBCA 27

COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW BRUNSWICK 56-09-CA STEVEN JOHN TOWER APPELLANT STEVEN JOHN TOWER APPELANT - and - - et - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN RESPONDENT SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE INTIMÉE Tower v. R., 2010 NBCA 27 Tower c.

R., 2010 NBCA 27 CORAM: The Honourable Justice Turnbull The Honourable Justice Bell The Honourable Justice Green CORAM : L’honorable juge Turnbull L’honorable juge Bell L’honorable juge Green Appeal from a decision of the Provincial Court: March 19, 2009 Appel d’une décision de la Cour provinciale : Le 19 mars 2009 History of Case: Decision under appeal: Unreported Preliminary or incidental proceedings: N/A Historique de la cause : Décision frappée d’appel : Inédite Procédures préliminaires ou accessoires : S.O. Appeal heard: January 13, 2010 Appel entendu : Le 13 janvier 2010

Judgment rendered: April 22, 2010 Jugement rendu : Le 22 avril 2010 Counsel at hearing: For the appellant: Steven John Tower appeared in person For the respondent: John Henheffer Avocats à l’audience : Pour l’appelant : Steven John Tower a comparu en personne Pour l’intimée : John Henheffer THE COURT Leave to appeal conviction and sentence is denied. LA COUR L’autorisation d’interjeter appel de la condamnation et de la peine est refusée.

The following is the judgment delivered by THE COURT [ 1 ] In the course of three court appearances held on January 19, February 18, and March 18, 2009, Steven John Tower pleaded guilty, with the assistance of counsel, to the following twenty Criminal Code offences: • six counts of indictable theft (s. 334( b )(i)); • three counts of

summary theft (s. 334( b )(ii)); • four counts of fraud (s. 380(1)( b )(i)); • four counts of failing to comply with conditions imposed by a court (s. 145(3)( a )); • one count each of failing to stop a motor vehicle at an accident scene with intent to escape civil or criminal liability (s. 252(1)( a )); assault upon a police officer in the execution of his duties (s. 270(2)( a )); obstructing a police officer (ss. 129(

a) and ( d )); and dangerous driving causing bodily harm (s. 249(3)). [ 2 ] Prior to accepting the pleas, the trial judge informed Mr. Tower of the consequence of his pleas and complied with s. 606 of the Code . Mr. Tower admitted the essential elements of each charge and acknowledged he was entering the pleas voluntarily. The trial judge imposed a total sentence of four years and ten months less 1 year credit because of Mr. Tower’s pre-trial custody. Mr. Tower appeals his convictions on the charges of assaulting a police officer and dangerous driving causing bodily harm.

He also appeals the sentence passed by the trial judge on each offence. [ 3 ] Mr. Tower’s rights of appeal are set out in ss. 675(1) and 675(1.1) of the Code which provide as follows:

(1) A person who is convicted by a trial court in proceedings by indictment may appeal to the court of appeal (

a) against his conviction (

i) on any ground of appeal that involves a question of law alone, (ii) on any ground of appeal that involves a question of fact or a question of mixed law and fact, with leave of the court of appeal or a judge thereof or on the certificate of the trial judge that the case is a proper case for appeal, or (iii) on any ground of appeal not mentioned in subparagraph (

i) or (ii) that appears to the court of appeal to be a sufficient ground of appeal, with leave of the court of appeal; or (

b) against the sentence passed by the trial court, with leave of the court of appeal or a judge thereof unless that sentence is one fixed by law.

(1.1) A person may appeal, pursuant to subsection (1), with leave of the court of appeal or a judge of that court, to that court in respect of a

summary conviction or a sentence passed with respect to a

summary conviction as if the

summary conviction had been a conviction in proceedings by indictment if (

a) there has not been an appeal with respect to the

summary conviction; (

b) the

summary conviction offence was tried with an indictable offence; and (

c) there is an appeal in respect of the indictable offence. […] 675.

(1) Une personne déclarée coupable par un tribunal de première instance dans des procédures sur acte d’accusation peut interjeter appel, devant la cour d’appel :

a) de sa déclaration de culpabilité : (

i) soit pour tout motif d’appel comportant une simple question de droit, (ii) soit pour tout motif d’appel comportant une question de fait, ou une question de droit et de fait, avec l’autorisation de la cour d’appel ou de l’un de ses juges ou sur certificat du juge de première instance attestant que la cause est susceptible d’appel, (iii) soit pour tout motif d’appel non mentionné au sous-alinéa (

i) ou (ii) et jugé suffisant par la cour d’appel, avec l’autorisation de celle-ci;

b) de la sentence rendue par le tribunal de première instance, avec l’autorisation de la cour d’appel ou de l’un de ses juges, à moins que cette sentence ne soit de celles que fixe la loi.

(1.1) Si la cour d’appel ou un de ses juges l’y autorise, une personne peut, conformément au paragraphe (1), interjeter appel d’une déclaration de culpabilité par procédure

sommaire ou de la peine qui a été infligée à l’égard de celle-ci, comme s’il s’agissait d’une déclaration de culpabilité par voie de mise en accusation, si les conditions suivantes sont réunies :

a) l’infraction de procédure

sommaire ne fait pas déjà l’objet d’un appel;

b) l’infraction de procédure

sommaire a été jugée en même temps qu’un acte criminel;

c) l’acte criminel fait déjà l’objet d’un appel. […]

[ 4 ] As this Court stated in R. v. Chiasson , [2008] N.B.J. No. 171 (QL) , 2008 NBCA 36 : A ground of appeal seeking to withdraw a plea of guilty involves a question of mixed law and fact, within the meaning of s. 675(1) ( a )(ii) of the Criminal Code . Leave to appeal is therefore required: R. v. Guignard (G.) (2003), 260 N.B.R. (2d) 396 , [2003] N.B.J. No. 264 (QL) , 2003 NBCA 46 ; R. v. Brun (T.) (2006), 296 N.B.R. (2d) 147 , [2006] N.B.J. No. 51 (QL) , 2006 NBCA 17 ; R. v. Winmill (R.L.) (2006), 300 N.B.R. (2d) 125 , [2006] N.B.J. No. 324 (QL) , 2006 NBCA 77 ; and R. v. Meade , [2007] N.B.J.

No. 237 (QL) , 2007 NBCA 56 . The guiding principles in considering an application for leave to withdraw a guilty plea were summarized in Brun (at para. 8 ): A court of appeal may allow an appellant to withdraw a guilty plea if the appellant can show that the plea was invalid, in the sense that it was not made voluntarily or unequivocally or that it was not informed: see R. v. Claveau (L.F.) (2003), 2003 NBCA 52 (CanLII) , 260 N.B.R. (2d) 192 (C.A.) and R. v. Nowlan (F.E.) , [2005] N.B.J. No. 474 (C.A.) (QL) . As noted in R. v.

Guignard , at para. 7, an appellant "must show valid grounds which would allow [him or her] to withdraw [his or her] guilty plea. This must be done by providing convincing evidence." In R. v. Claveau (L.F.) (2003), 260 N.B.R. (2d) 192 , [2003] N.B.J. No. 285 (QL) , 2003 NBCA 52 , Deschênes J.A. explained as follows at para. 7: For the plea to be valid, it must be made voluntarily and unequivocally. The plea must also be an informed one, in the sense that the accused must be aware of the nature of the allegations made against him and of the effect and the consequences of his plea. See R. v.

Lyons , 1987 CanLII 25 (SCC) , [1987] 2 S.C.R. 309 . As the previous decisions of this Court clearly indicate, a court of appeal may allow an appellant to withdraw a guilty plea only if the appellant can provide convincing evidence that the plea was invalid, in the sense that it was not made voluntarily or unequivocally or that it was not informed. [paras. 5-8] [ 5 ] Mr. Tower not only requires leave to withdraw his guilty pleas, he also requires leave before he can appeal the sentence passed ( ss. 675(1) ( b ), 675(1.1)). [ 6 ] Given that Mr.

Tower was represented by counsel throughout, the clear and careful instructions by the trial judge, Mr. Tower’s acknowledgement that he understood the nature of the accusations against him and his voluntary pleas of guilty, we are of the view leave should not be granted to appeal either of the two convictions at issue. Furthermore, we are of the view leave should not be granted to appeal the sentence passed by the trial judge. [ 7 ] Leave to appeal conviction and sentence is denied. _______________________________ WALLACE S. TURNBULL, J.A.

_______________________________ B. RICHARD BELL, J.A. ______________________________ BRADLEY V. GREEN, J.A.