Appeal by accused from convictions for sexual assault, sexual touching and invitation to sexual touching. Accused claimed trial counsel was incompetent in conduct of his defence and her assistance was ineffective. Appeals dismissed. Accused’s main complaint was that his trial counsel refused to allow him to testify at trial. Court agreed with counsel’s assessment that accused’s testimony would have damaged his defence. Accused agreed not to testify but argued he did not mean what he said. He failed to establish requisite factual basis for incompetence allegation and he also failed to provide evidence of prejudice that arose from counsel’s alleged incompetence.
R. v. B. (W.E.) (Jan. 16, 2014, S.C.C., McLachlan C.J.C., LeBel J., Abella J., Rothstein J., Cromwell J., Moldaver J., and Wagner J., File No. 35089) Decision at 104 W.C.B. (2d) 203 was affirmed. 111 W.C.B. (2d) 270.