Whether repeated confusion and renewed requests for counsel by a visibly vulnerable Indigenous detainee revive the right to counsel under the open category recognized in R. v. Sinclair — Whether, in complex multi-accused first-degree-murder trials involving party liability, constructive murder, intoxication and lesser-included offences, no evidence directions delivered without a contemporaneous restatement of the Crown’s burden impermissibly shift that burden and undermine the presumption of innocence. — dismissed 09/18/2025 — Supreme Advocacy acted as agent for the Applicant.
Read the lower court decision from the ABCA here.