R v. Paquette

R v. Paquette

The applicant failed to establish on the necessary high degree of probability that without counsel he would be denied a fair trial and failed to prove financial indigency or reasonable efforts to raise funds; therefore a Rowbotham order and stay of proceedings are not warranted and the application must be dismissed.

Citation
2017 BCSC 2202
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Marcus John Paquette
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal (child Pornography and Firearms Storage Charges) / Rowbotham Application for Court Appointed Counsel After Preliminary Inquiry (pre Trial)
Outcome
Application dismissed; no Rowbotham order or stay of proceedings granted.
Legal Topics
Rowbotham Application, Right to Counsel, Indigency/financial Eligibility, Stay of Proceedings, Fair Trial Principles
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Access to Justice Legal Aid Rowbotham Application Right to Counsel Indigency/financial Eligibility Stay of Proceedings +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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 17
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Marcus John Paquette

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (child Pornography and Firearms Storage Charges) / Rowbotham Application for Court Appointed Counsel After Preliminary Inquiry (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether state-funded counsel is essential to ensure a fair trial under Rowbotham
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is financially unable to retain counsel (indigency)
  3. 3 Whether a stay of proceedings is warranted as an extraordinary remedy

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish on the necessary high degree of probability that without counsel he would be denied a fair trial and failed to prove financial indigency or reasonable efforts to raise funds; therefore a Rowbotham order and stay of proceedings are not warranted and the application must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; no Rowbotham order or stay of proceedings granted.

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • No stay of proceedings; no appointment of government-funded counsel