Nunavut court orders funds to pay for convicted murderer’s appeal lawyer

Jeffrey Salomonie is being given funding for a lawyer so he can appeal his 2016 conviction for first-degree murder, following the death of Daisy Curley. (FILE PHOTO)

A Cape Dorset man convicted two and a half years ago of first-degree murder is appealing his case, and a Nunavut judge has ruled that Canada’s attorney general will front the man’s legal costs for that appeal.

Jeffrey Salomonie, 51, applied in July to have the court assign him a lawyer after Nunavut’s legal aid office denied him counsel last year.

Salomonie is appealing a mandatory life sentence for the 2009 rape and murder of 33-year-old Daisy Curley.

A family member found the woman dead in her Happy Valley home around five days after she died. Curley was half clothed and had been beaten with a hockey stick.

Forensic reports show that the woman died from blood loss after she sustained around 20 blunt force lacerations to her head and face, Nunatsiaq News reported at the time of the guilty verdict.

Canada’s Criminal Code allows a judge of the court of appeal to assign counsel to an accused when that support is “in the interest of justice.”

Sharkey first ruled that Salomonie would be unable to pay for a lawyer on his own, given that legal aid had provided counsel during the man’s initial trial.

“The ‘interests of justice’ require this court to consider Mr. Salomonie’s age, education, ability to understand and to express himself, experience with the criminal process and the complexity of the appeal,” Sharkey said.

As the charge is for first-degree murder, the judgement found that the appeal would be “exceedingly complex.”

Salomonie’s records show he has a Grade 5 education and that he has never held a job that required public speaking or independent research.

“From this evidence alone it appears desirable, in the interests of justice, that Mr. Salomonie have legal representation to ensure this appeal can move forward,” Sharkey said.

Salomonie also suffers from hearing loss and currently makes his court appearances over video from a federal prison. English is his second language.

All these conditions considered, Sharkey ruled that it would be “unrealistic” to expect Salomonie to represent himself.

Sharkey’s judgement is an attempt to hasten the appeal, because it has been dragging on since the spring of 2016, shortly after Salomonie was sentenced.

That delay is pinned on a paperwork mix-up, following Salomonie’s incorrect filing for the appeal. This meant the appeal didn’t get on the appeal docket for 15 months, and wasn’t heard first until November 2017.

That’s when Salomonie found that legal aid had denied him counsel for the appeal.

Salomonie applied to have the court assign him a lawyer on the suggestion of Sharkey, who said he saw “no prospects” for the appeal to move forward without a lawyer.

This route kept the appeal “from becoming stale due to the passage of time,” Sharkey said.

R v Salomonie, 2018 NUCA 5 by NunatsiaqNews on Scribd