R. v. Wagar
The Court found no basis in the record to support the appellant's claims and held the guilty plea was voluntary, unequivocal and fully informed; the conviction is upheld.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2018 ONCA 907
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Kevin Wagar
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 13 November 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Guilty Plea Voluntariness, Judicial Bias, Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, Solicitor Client Privilege, Breach of Plea Agreement
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Kevin Wagar
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Judicial bias
- 2 Voluntariness and informed nature of guilty plea
- 3 Ineffective assistance of counsel
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found no basis in the record to support the appellant's claims and held the guilty plea was voluntary, unequivocal and fully informed; the conviction is upheld.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Conviction appeal dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Wagar Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2018-11-13 Neutral citation 2018 ONCA 907 Docket numbers C63102 Judges Feldman, Kathryn N.; Roberts, Lois B.; Fairburn, J. Michal Subject Criminal Decision Content COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: R. v. Wagar, 2018 ONCA 907 DATE: 20181113 DOCKET: C63102 Feldman, Roberts and Fairburn JJ.A. BETWEEN Her Majesty the Queen Respondent and Kevin Wagar Appellant Kevin Wagar, in person Lorna Bolton, for the respondent Heard and released orally: November 5, 2018 On appeal from the conviction entered on May 27, 2016 and the sentence imposed on August 22, 2016 by Justice Wolfram Tausendfreund of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting without a jury. REASONS FOR DECISION [1] The appellant claims there were many errors at his guilty plea and the subsequent proceedings. [2] They can be grouped into the following general categories: i. the trial judge was biased; ii. the guilty plea was not voluntary or informed; iii. he was provided with ineffective assistance of counsel at trial; iv. there was a breach of solicitor client privilege; and v. the Crown did not honour the purported agreement that she would not read facts into the record on the day of the guilty plea. [3] We see no basis in the record to support any of these claims. The record amply supports the appellant’s convictions and that his guilty plea was voluntary, unequivocal and fully informed. [4] The conviction appeal is dismissed. “K. Feldman J.A.” “L.B. Roberts J.A.” “Fairburn J.A.”