Textbook Notes (362,935)
Canada (158,107)
Criminology (610)
CRIM 330 (7)
Chapter Right to be Tried with Reasonable Time

CRIM 330 Chapter Right to be Tried with Reasonable Time: CRIM330: RIGHT TO BE TRIED WITHIN REASONABLE TIME

2 Pages
Unlock Document

Simon Fraser University
CRIM 330
David Mac Alister

RIGHT TO BE TRIED WITHIN REASONABLE TIME R. v. Askov​ [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1199, 79 C.R. (3d) 273, 59 C.C.C. (3d) 449 (S.C.C.) Court:​ ​SCC ​[Cory, J] Issue:​ ​Was s. 11(b) violated? Area of law:​ ​Conspiracy to commit extortion Facts:​ ​A charged in Nov, 1983. Prelim was set for July, 1984 but was not completed until Sept. Trial date was set for Oct, 1985 but the case could not be accommodated during the session + was delayed until Sept 1986; ~2yrs after prelim hearing. When trial began, A moved for a stay of proceedings on the grounds of unreasonable delay. Trial judge granted the stay + indicated institutional problems were a major cause of delay (lack of courtrooms/judges/Crown Counsel). Decision of court: ​SCC found that the delays were indeed unreasonable + directed a stay of proceedings. Ratio Decidendi: ​Four factors for unreasonable delay: 1. Length of delay ● Longer = more difficult to excuse; lengthy delays are prima facie excessive + cannot be excused ● Complex cases may justify longer delays ● Delays owing to actions of the Crown weigh in favour of the accused 2. Explanation for the delay ● Delays owing to inadequate institutional resources weigh against the Crown; burden to justify falls upon Crown ○ In determining whether delay is unreasonable, the jurisdiction in question may be compared to others in the country, using obtaining conditions in better, not worse, districts as a standard of comparison 3. Waiver of the right by the accused ● A waiver of the right by the accused may justify the delay, but the waiver must be “informed, unequivocal and freely given” 4. Prejudice to the accused ● In absence of a waiver, when a trial has been substantially delayed, a certain prejudice to the interest of the accused may be inferred where it is not rebutted by the Crown R. v. Morin​ [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771, 12 C.R. (4th) 1, 71 C.C.C. (3d) 1 (S.C.C.) Court: ​SCC ​[Sopinka, J] Issue:​ ​s. 11(b) violated? Area of law: ​Impaired driving, trial within a reasonable time Facts:​ ​M charged with driving w/ excess amount of alcohol on Jan 9, 1988; she appears in PrCT on Feb 23, her counsel requested the earliest trial date and the trial was set for March 28, 1989. She brought a motion on stay of proceedings, arguing that the 141/2-month delay infringed her right to be trial within a reasonable time. The motion was dismissed + M was convicted on the “over 80” charge. Summary conviction appeal court stayed the charge, Ont COA allowed the Crown’s appeal + restore the conviction. The accused appealed. Decision of court: ​Appeal dismissed, no need for remedy as s. 11(b) was not violated based on the guideline. An institutional delay of 6-10months is expected @PrCT Only delayed to 8months. No prejudice against accused. Ratio Decidendi: ● Based on guidelines: 1. Length of delay 2. Waiver of time periods; 3. The reasons for the delay, including a) inherent time requirements of the case; b) actions of the accused; c) actions of the Crown; d) limits on institutional resources, and, e) other reasons for delay, and 4. Prejudice to the accused Dissenting reasons: ​[Lamer, J] - ​Appeal + restore the stay; delay caused stigma to persist R. v. Jordan​ 2016 SCC 27, [2016] 1 S.C.R. 631 Court: ​SCC ​[Moldaver, J] Issue: ​s. 11(b) violated? Area of law:​ ​Right to be tried within a reasonable time Facts: ​J was charged in Dec, 2008 for dial-a-dope operation, his trial ended in Feb, 2013. J brought an application under s. 11(b), seeking a stay of proceedings due to the delay. In dismissing the application, trial judge applied ​Morin ​framework, J was convicted, COA dismissed appeal. Decision of court: ​Appeal should be allowed, convictions set aside + a stay of proceedings entered as s. 11(b) was violated Reasons for decision: ​Total delay between charges + end of trial was 49.5months, 4 months were waived by J when he changed counsel, 1.5months for adjournment of prelim because counsel was unavailable. The remaining d
More Less

Related notes for CRIM 330

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.