The Right to Counsel: The Truth, The Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth

1. The Right to Counsel: The Truth, The Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth Suzanne Costom, Shadley Battista, s.e.n.c November 22, 2011 Unepenséed’avance – Think Ahead

2. INTRODUCTION • It’s just not like in the movies.

3. Sources The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 10 (b): Everyone has the right on arrest or detention: (a) to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor; (b) to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and • to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful. Link between 10(a) and (b) – R. v. Black, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 138 at para 24.

4. The reason for the right • Trial fairness: • Clarksonv. The Queen, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 383 at para 17 • Information and the relationship with other constitutionally protected rights • Rv. Manninen, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 1233 at para23 • R. v. Whittle, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 914 at 29 • Free Choice • R. v. Willier, [2010 ] 2 S.C.R. 429 at paras 26 et seq. • R. v. Bartle, [1994] 3 S.C.R 173 at para 16 • R. Whittle, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 914 at 30

5. The content of the right to counsel • Informational • Implementational

6. Informational • Availability of Legal Aid and Duty Counsel: • R. v. Brydges, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 190; R. v. Bartle, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 173 • Change of Circumstances • R. v. Black [1989] 2 S.C.R. 138 at 152-53; R. v. Evans, [2004] 3 S.C.R. 59 • Language • R. v. Mann, [2004] 3 S.C.R. 59 at para 21 [re: s. 10(a)] • R. v.Evans, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 869 • Timing – arrest or detention • R. v. Suberu, [2009] 2 S.C.R. 460 at paras 37 et seq. • R. v. Grant, [2009] 2 S.C.R. 353.

7. Implementational • Provide a reasonable opportunity to exercise the right to counsel • R. v. Manninen, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 1233 at para 21. • R v. Willier, [2010] 2 S.C.R. 429 • Refrain from eliciting evidence (“hold off”) until the arrested or detained person has had a “reasonable opportunity” to exercise the right • R. v. Manninen, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 1233 at para 23. • R. v. Ross,[1989] 1 S.C.R. 3. • R. v. Sinclair, [2010] 2 S.C.R. 310 at paras 47 et seq. • Privacy • R. v. Playford (1987), 40 C.C.C. (3d) 142 (Ont C.A.)

8. IMPLEMENTIONAL (cont) • More than one call • R. v. Loutit, [1974] M.J. 76 (C.A.) • R. v. Pavel (1989), 36 O.AC. 328 (C.A.) • Onus on individuals to be “reasonably diligent” in exercising their rights • R. v. Tremblay,[1987] 2 S.C.R. 435 *Interplay between the Informational and Implementational Components of s. 10(b): • R. v. Prosper, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 236 • R. v. Sinclair, [2010] 2 S.C.R. 310.

9. Recent Developments on the Implementational Component of the Right to Counsel:The Sinclair trilogy • R. v. Sinclair, [2010] 2 S.C.R. 310 • R. v. McCrimmon, [2010] 2 S.C.R. 402 • R. v. Willier, [2010] 2 S.C.R. 429

10. The Truth about The Right to Counsel • Multiple Consultations? • Not usually (Sinclair) • Police tactics? (R. v. Burlingham, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 206) • Counsel of Choice? • Within reason (Willier) • Presence of Counsel • No (Sinclair)

11. Conclusion – What to Do When The Client Calls • Speak to the investigator so you know what charges your client is facing and the strength of the evidence. • Don’t merely recite the right to silence – explain what that means • Explain the need to be diligent in asserting their rights • Explain potential interrogation techniques