Stay of Proceedings (Cases): Difference between revisions

From Criminal Law Notebook
m Text replacement - "\'\'R v ([a-zA-Z]+)\'\'\,<Br> \[http:\/\/canlii.ca\/t\/([a-z0-9]+) ([0-9]+ [A-Z]+ [0-9]+)\] \([a-zA-Z]+\)\{" to "{{CanLIIR-S|$1|$2|$3 (CanLII)}}{"
m Text replacement - "\'\'R v ([^\']+)\'\',[\s]*<[Bb][Rr]\>[\s]*\[http:\/\/canlii.ca\/t\/([a-zA-Z0-9]+) ([0-9]{4} [a-zA-Z]+ [0-9]+)\] \(([^\)]+)\)\{" to "{{CanLIIR-S|$1|$2|$3 ($4)}}{"
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 9: Line 9:
| {{CanLIIR-S|Chen|25tlr|2009 ONCJ 453 (CanLII)}}{{perONCJ|Fairgrieve J}} || stayed || breach s. 7 for crown changing mind to stay charges. Stay upheld.
| {{CanLIIR-S|Chen|25tlr|2009 ONCJ 453 (CanLII)}}{{perONCJ|Fairgrieve J}} || stayed || breach s. 7 for crown changing mind to stay charges. Stay upheld.
|-
|-
|''R v Arcand'', <Br>[http://canlii.ca/t/20hqp 2008 ONCA 595] (CanLII){{perONCA|Cronk JA}}||denied || alleged disclosure issues, laying additional charges, differential treatment of accused.
|{{CanLIIR-S|Arcand|20hqp|2008 ONCA 595 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|Cronk JA}}||denied || alleged disclosure issues, laying additional charges, differential treatment of accused.
|}
|}


Line 19: Line 19:
| {{CanLIIR-S|Vader|fw36g|2013 ABQB 68 (CanLII)}}{{perABQB| Ross J}} || not stayed ||
| {{CanLIIR-S|Vader|fw36g|2013 ABQB 68 (CanLII)}}{{perABQB| Ross J}} || not stayed ||
|-
|-
|''R v Tweedly'', <Br> [http://canlii.ca/t/fxkfs 2013 BCSC 910] (CanLII){{perBCSC| Greyell J}} ||  stayed || Two police witnesses lost their notes. The notes were used in the ITO of a search warrant.
|{{CanLIIR-S|Tweedly|fxkfs|2013 BCSC 910 (CanLII)}}{{perBCSC| Greyell J}} ||  stayed || Two police witnesses lost their notes. The notes were used in the ITO of a search warrant.
|}
|}


Line 27: Line 27:
! Case Name !! Result !! Summary
! Case Name !! Result !! Summary
|-
|-
| ''R v Tang''<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/fnl1b 2011 ONCJ 525] (CanLII){{perONCJ|Reinhardt J}} || stay granted||
| {{CanLIIR-S|Tang|fnl1b|2011 ONCJ 525 (CanLII)}}{{perONCJ|Reinhardt J}} || stay granted||
|}
|}


Line 37: Line 37:
|{{CanLIIR-S|Maskell|fm5zv|2011 ABPC 176 (CanLII)}}{{perABPC|Groves J}} || stay || force used while arresting for driving while disqualified
|{{CanLIIR-S|Maskell|fm5zv|2011 ABPC 176 (CanLII)}}{{perABPC|Groves J}} || stay || force used while arresting for driving while disqualified
|-
|-
|''R v Steele'',<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/28z27 2010 ABQB 191] (CanLII){{perABQB| Macklin J}} || stay ||excessive force in arresting accused
|{{CanLIIR-S|Steele|28z27|2010 ABQB 191 (CanLII)}}{{perABQB| Macklin J}} || stay ||excessive force in arresting accused
|}
|}


==Delay==
==Delay==
* [[Charter Delay (Cases)]]
* [[Charter Delay (Cases)]]

Latest revision as of 15:45, 1 March 2021

Section 7: Prosecutor Abuse of Process

Case Name Result Summary
R v Chen, 2009 ONCJ 453 (CanLII), per Fairgrieve J stayed breach s. 7 for crown changing mind to stay charges. Stay upheld.
R v Arcand, 2008 ONCA 595 (CanLII), per Cronk JA denied alleged disclosure issues, laying additional charges, differential treatment of accused.

Section 7 - Disclosure

Case Name Result Summary
R v Vader, 2013 ABQB 68 (CanLII), per Ross J not stayed
R v Tweedly, 2013 BCSC 910 (CanLII), per Greyell J stayed Two police witnesses lost their notes. The notes were used in the ITO of a search warrant.

Section 12 - Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Case Name Result Summary
R v Tang, 2011 ONCJ 525 (CanLII), per Reinhardt J stay granted

Abuse by Police

Case Name Result Summary
R v Maskell, 2011 ABPC 176 (CanLII), per Groves J stay force used while arresting for driving while disqualified
R v Steele, 2010 ABQB 191 (CanLII), per Macklin J stay excessive force in arresting accused

Delay