R. v. Corning

canada, canadian, case law, court opinion, canlii, nsca, 2026nsca67, 2026 nsca 67 (canlii), 2026, nsca, 67, (canlii), cac 547458, 2026, procedure, criminal appeal, appointment of counsel, criminal code, s. 684, whether appellant lacked sufficient means to retain counsel, financial disclosure through affidavit and cross, examination, unemployment, health issues, modest income and bank balances considered, means to retain private counsel not established, motion dismissed, procedure, criminal appeal, appointment of counsel, interests of justice, whether appointing counsel was desirable in the interests of justice, merits, complexity, ability to self, represent, court’s capacity without counsel assessed, appeal book prepared, factum and possible fresh evidence motion noted, fair hearing found without counsel, motion dismissed, procedure, criminal appeal, threshold assessment, arguable issue and complexity, how arguable issues are assessed on a s. 684 motion, misapprehension of evidence, beyond reasonable doubt, bias, ineffective counsel, withheld evidence alleged, grounds read in light of lack of legal training, case not complex, video evidence noted, motion dismissed, rights and freedoms, fair trial, self, represented appellant, role of court and crown, court’s duty to assist an unrepresented person and crown obligation of fairness, references to r. v. grenkow, r. v. morton and boucher v. the queen, assurance that appropriate legal principles will be applied on appeal, fair hearing without counsel, motion dismissed