Legal aid denied to drug dealer

A convicted drug dealer from Vernon who applied to have a lawyer appointed to argue the appeal of one of his convictions was denied by the B.C. Supreme Court.

In January 2017, Ronald Charles Learning was convicted of 21 of the 22 counts with which he was charged relating to a drug dealing operation and sentenced to six years in jail.

In January 2015, Canadian Border Services intercepted a box at Vancouver International Airport, where it crossed the border from Thailand.

The box contained 363.3 grams of heroin, valued at $40,000.

The designated recipient of the box was a woman in Vernon.

The box and its contents were turned over to the RCMP.

The heroin was replaced with a placebo, and dye and a GPS device were placed inside the box.

An undercover police officer, posing as a UPS delivery person, delivered the box on Jan. 12.

Learning was arrested after picking up the box from the Vernon residence.

A search of Learning’s home resulted in the discovery of four handguns, ammunition and cartridge magazines for the handguns, a stolen passport and birth certificate, oxycodone, hydromorphone, morphine and marijuana.

Of the 21 convictions, Learning took issue only with the possession of weapons charges.

Learning argued the trial judge erred by misapprehending or disregarding relevant evidence and that the judge erred by failing to properly apply the law with respect to circumstantial evidence.

In his recent decision, B.C. Court of Appeal Justice John Savage wrote he was not persuaded there was any merit to the allegations of errors.

“It appears as though the case against (Learning) was straightforward and overwhelming,” he wrote.

Learning applied for legal aid for both his conviction and sentence appeals.

He was granted legal aid for his sentence appeal, but his application for the conviction appeal was rejected.

Learning said he had debts totalling $22,500, and that he had no income and no possessions.

Otherwise, no financial information was filed with the court.

“In my view, the financial disclosure in this application is deficient,” wrote Savage.

One of the factors considered when granting counsel to an accused is if the accused will be able to present the case on his or her own.

“I am not persuaded that the points to be argued on appeal are complex,” wrote Savage. “In my view, it would not be desirable in the interests of justice to appoint state-funded counsel in this case. The application is dismissed.”