Court of Appeal

CASE NO.                                     VOL. NO.                                            PAGE

DONALD ROBERT ANDERSEN                                                HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                         - and -                                                                        

(Appellant)                                                                                                                  (Respondent)

C.A.C. No. 147502                                  Halifax, N.S.                                      FREEMAN, J.A.

Cite as: R. v. Andersen, 1999 NSCA 80

APPEAL HEARD:                                 March 31, 1999

JUDGMENT DELIVERED:                 April 7, 1999

SUBJECT:         Criminal Law, assaults, break and enter; credibility; right to counsel, search and seizure.

SUMMARY:        The appellant has appealed his convictions on two counts of assault with a weapon, one of break and enter, and one of failure to comply with a probation order, for which he received a sentence totalling six and a half years.  He entered a house and attacked his wife and a mutual friend.  He was arrested at the home of another friend and police seized his car keys and the flashlight used in the assault, which was visible in his car parked outside.  For reasons of security and privacy he was not permitted to call until he was at the police station, where he contacted a lawyer.  He was not questioned in the interval and the evidence against him was not conscripted.  He did not testify at the jury trial, and his wife’s account of the incident was uncontradicted and supported by that of the friend.  On the appeal he sought to discredit his wife’s testimony but was not successful in introducing fresh evidence.

ISSUES:              Was the conviction reasonable?  Were his rights to counsel and against unreasonable search and seizure infringed?  Was he ineffectively represented?

RESULT:            The appeal was dismissed.  The jury was properly instructed and it's verdict was reasonable. Police had reason to provide him with the right

to counsel in the manner they chose, and a common law right to seize the flashlight incidental to his arrest.  The record did not disclose that he had not been effectively represented