R. v. Jones

R. v. Jones

Investigator evidence established that the children (ages 3 and 6) and the estranged spouse are vulnerable and likely to be intimidated, traumatized or inhibited by direct cross-examination by the accused such that a full and candid account would not be obtained; statutory framework (s.486.3(1) and (2)) mandates...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2011 NSPC 3
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Dalton Cornelius Jones
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Application Hearing Under S.486.3 Criminal Code to Appoint Counsel for Cross Examination
Outcome
Crown's applications granted
Legal Topics
Appointment of Counsel for Cross Examination, Section 486.3 Criminal Code, Vulnerable Witnesses, Self Representation Limitation, Use of Hearsay in Preliminary Applications
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Evidence Family/intimate Partner Violence Child Protection Procedural Law Appointment of Counsel for Cross Examination Section 486.3 Criminal Code Vulnerable Witnesses +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Dalton Cornelius Jones

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial Application Hearing Under S.486.3 Criminal Code to Appoint Counsel for Cross Examination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether counsel must be appointed under s.486.3(1) for witnesses under 18
  2. 2 Whether counsel must be appointed under s.486.3(2) for an adult witness to obtain a full and candid account
  3. 3 Interaction between accused's right to self-representation and statutory appointment of counsel for cross-examination

Ratio Decidendi

Investigator evidence established that the children (ages 3 and 6) and the estranged spouse are vulnerable and likely to be intimidated, traumatized or inhibited by direct cross-examination by the accused such that a full and candid account would not be obtained; statutory framework (s.486.3(1) and (2)) mandates appointment of counsel in those circumstances, and this limited curtailment of personal cross-examination is justified despite the accused's self-representation.

Court Disposition

Crown's applications granted

Orders

  • Pursuant to s.486.3(1) Criminal Code, counsel is appointed to conduct the cross-examination of Nila (age 3) and Isha (age 6) on behalf of the accused.
  • Pursuant to s.486.3(2) Criminal Code, counsel is appointed to conduct the cross-examination of Shaelynn Jones on behalf of the accused.