R. v. Hillman

R. v. Hillman

The application for state-funded counsel was dismissed because the applicant failed on the balance of probabilities to show that without counsel his Charter right to a fair trial would be violated given the nature of the charges, low likelihood of imprisonment, short and non-complex trial, and his failure to provide the detailed financial disclosure and evidence of efforts to obtain counsel despite court directions; the constitutional challenge lacked an air of reality and Legal Aid denial was based on lack of merit.

Citation
2016 NSSC 295
Parties
Prosecution: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Andrew Douglas Hillman
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Rowbotham Application for State Funded Counsel
Outcome
Application for state-funded counsel dismissed
Legal Topics
Right to Counsel, Section 7, Section 11(d), Rowbotham Application, State Funded Counsel, Controlled Drugs and Substances Act
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Charter of Rights and Freedoms Legal Aid/access to Counsel Right to Counsel Section 7 Section 11(d) Rowbotham Application State Funded Counsel +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Prosecution

Andrew Douglas Hillman

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial Rowbotham Application for State Funded Counsel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether accused is entitled to state-funded counsel under s.24(1) of the Charter based on s.7 and s.11(d)
  2. 2 Whether the accused can receive a fair trial without legal counsel
  3. 3 Whether the accused exhausted all avenues to obtain counsel and provided detailed financial disclosure

Ratio Decidendi

The application for state-funded counsel was dismissed because the applicant failed on the balance of probabilities to show that without counsel his Charter right to a fair trial would be violated given the nature of the charges, low likelihood of imprisonment, short and non-complex trial, and his failure to provide the detailed financial disclosure and evidence of efforts to obtain counsel despite court directions; the constitutional challenge lacked an air of reality and Legal Aid denial was based on lack of merit.

Court Disposition

Application for state-funded counsel dismissed

Orders

  • Application for state-funded counsel is dismissed.