Switching between defence and Crown – interview with Law Times

When I trace a path through my career as a criminal lawyer, it is interesting to see how many times I have moved from being a defence lawyer to a Crown and back again. I’m not alone in that: the criminal bar in Ontario is made of many lawyers who have switched sides, sometimes on more than one occasion. There’s nothing wrong with that. In fact, I believe that it is one of the qualities that makes the Ontario criminal bar so respected in the profession and by the courts. We understand the other side, can discuss issues to work them out, and have knowledge about how the other side will approach a given case – because many of us have been on the other side.

I have often advocated that most Crown’s should take a secondment in seeing how cases are run from the defence side, and most defence lawyers should do some shifts as a per diem Crown to understand how the Crown prosecutes and administers cases.

However, what does that mean for the public perception of the criminal bar? Are we almost too cavalier about it in the profession? Should we be doing a better job at taking steps to ensure that there is no public perception of a conflict? Well, that’s what Justice Douglas Shaw of the Superior Court of Justice found in a recent case called R. v. Mandamin. His Honour found that when a defence lawyer becomes a full-time Crown, steps need to be documented to ensure that there are no discussions of the lawyer’s former clients and cases – and disqualified a Crown’s office from prosecuting a case when such steps were not taken.

I was interviewed by Alex Robinson at the Law Times about the Mandamin case and what impact it will have for the lawyers switching sides. You can read the full article here.