Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 15 OCTOBER 2014

R. v. P.C.: No Automatic Constitutional Right To State-Funded Counsel For First Appeal In Criminal Cases

Justice Weiler rejected an accused’s argument that he had an automatic right to state-funded counsel for a first appeal in a criminal case.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

In her August 12, 2014 decision, R. v. P.C., Justice Weiler, for a unanimous Ontario Court of Appeal, rejected an accused's argument that he had an automatic right to state-funded counsel for a first appeal in a criminal case and that any obligation upon him to show that his appeal had some merit offended the Charter. In doing so, she also gave a comprehensive overview of when s. 684(1) of the Criminal Code will lead to a conclusion that it is in the "interests of justice" for an appellate court to appoint counsel for an accused. In overview, she held:

[4] Because the accused's liberty interests are affected, s. 7 gives him the right to state funded counsel where it is essential to ensure the exercise of his right of appeal is both meaningful and effective. This determination is made on a case-specific basis. The fact that s. 684 does not give an accused person an automatic right to publicly funded counsel in all cases does not violate the Charter of Rights

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from