|
Criminal - Bail. R. v. Kuang
In R. v. Kuang (Ont CA, 2026) the Ontario Court of Appeal allowed a defendant's criminal appeal, this brought against convictions for "assault (Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 266), assault causing bodily harm (s. 267(b)), break and enter (s. 348(1)(b)), and two counts of threatening to use a weapon (s. 267(a))".
Here the court considers whether any duty lay on counsel to arrange bail surety:[50] The appellant also appears to criticize trial counsel for not sourcing or locating a suitable surety. But that is not the role of counsel; it is up to the client or the client’s family to identify potential sureties.
[51] The appellant relies on the fact that he was released on bail, with a surety, after the close of the evidence at trial. The surety was a family friend. Presumably, had that person been identified earlier, the appellant’s release may have been secured. However, the appellant offers no explanation as to why this person was not identified to act as surety earlier.
[52] I accept that a different lawyer may have run a bail hearing without a surety and offered a sizeable cash bail. But it is impossible to know whether that would have been successful.
|
