LeBlanc v. R., 2012 NBCA 98 (CanLII)Related decisionsCourt of Queen's Bench of New BrunswickLeBlanc v. R.,) COURT OF APPEAL OFNEW BRUNSWICK Pour l’appelant :Charles Joseph LeBlanc a comparu en personne Pour l’intimée :Christopher Lavigne THE COURT The application for leave to appeal the conviction is dismissed. LA COUR La demande d’autorisation d’interjeter appel de la déclaration de culpabilité est rejetée. The following is the judgment delivered by THE COURT  Charles Joseph LeBlanc seeks leave to appeal a decision of the Summary Conviction Appeal Court, dated July 6, 2012, dismissing his appeal from conviction on a charge of causing a disturbance in a public place (s. 175(1)(a) of the Criminal Code). In the Court of Queen’s Bench, Mr. LeBlanc had been seeking to withdraw his guilty plea, arguing his plea in the Provincial Court had been “uninformed and involuntary.” The Summary Conviction Appeal Court judge applied the law as set out in Miller v. R., 2011 NBCA 52 (CanLII), 2011 NBCA 52, 374 N.B.R. (2d) 302, Chiasson v. R., 2008 NBCA 36 (CanLII), 2008 NBCA 36,  N.B.J. No. 171 (QL), and other cases, and came to the conclusion that, on the facts, Mr. LeBlanc had not demonstrated that his plea was “uninformed or not voluntarily made.”  Section 839(1)(a) of the Criminal Code provides that an appeal only lies to the Court of Appeal from a decision of the Summary Conviction Appeal Court on a question of law alone. Time and again, this Court has stated that “the withdrawal of a guilty plea involves a question of mixed law and fact”: Miller, at para. 6, and the cases cited therein. In the circumstances of this case, we would have no jurisdiction to allow this appeal if leave were granted, because the issues raised do not involve a question of law alone. For these reasons, we dismiss Mr. LeBlanc’s application for leave to appeal.
Pretty scary - facts are more often the reason for appeal...
Charles: Why didn't you have legal aid for the initial court appearance for the s. 175(1)(a) of the Criminal Code???
Charles already told us legal aid refused him counsel saying he could not go to prison for a summary convictiion such as this - for which the Criminal Code confirms he could be imprisoned for 2 years. Same old BS.
If you read the above, then read the below:"There has quite recently and rapidly come into use in ourdecisions the so-called mixed question of law and fact. This term has been used by law writers and judges for a long period of time, but not in the sense in which it is used to-day""It is a creation of the judicial precedent. That the judicial precedent is being sorely tried in this country cannot be doubted. It had its origin in a country with but one court of last resort and that court considered but few cases. There was time for deliberation. We have two systems of courts exercising juris- diction over the same territory, and many courts of last resort working on comparatively independent lines. They are crowded and their work must be rushed with the rapidity of legislation. They have no time to digest the questions brought before them.It is not a question of ability but of time. No age has surpassed the present in the ability of its judiciary. But in the terrible pace that is necessary in order to keep up with the march of progress, a rule of law is demanded on the moment to meet the requirements of a particular set of facts. It is hastily announced. It is given out as a general rule, the court having no time to study it out and hedge it about with the necessary limitations. Presently it is applied to a set of facts to which it has no proper application, and this improper application is made use of because the rule was not limited when first announced and it was not so limited for want of time to duly consider it."
"Charles already told us ...", being the key phrase, so I'll take your post for what it's worth: not much.
Just a couple of suggestions, Charles. Your main web page takes too long too load, there is too much stuff on it. There is also too much on it about the problems your having with the Fredericton Police Dept., and not enough about other things that are happening in New Brunswick, but it's your blog you can put what you want on it.
Is Leblanc IS never again???
Post a Comment