- 注册
- 2002-10-07
- 消息
- 402,183
- 荣誉分数
- 76
- 声望点数
- 0
A judge will decide whether a motion to dismiss dangerous driving charges against Steven Conley due to unreasonable trial delays can proceed after the defence’s charter application was itself not submitted on time.
Ontario Court Justice David Berg will make his ruling Tuesday on whether to allow Conley’s defence to pursue a late-filed application under Section 11b of the charter, now commonly known as a Jordan application, named after the 2016 Supreme Court of Canada ruling.
The defence tandem of Dominic Lamb and Fady Mansour filed notice in May it sought to dismiss the charges under the charter challenge, while Crown prosecutor John Ramsay argued in court Friday the defence missed the court deadline in filing its charter application.
According to provincial court rules, the charter application must be filed 90 days ahead of the trial. The defence filed notice of the application with the Crown on May 25. It was stamped and court-certified on June 18.
Conley’s trial began Monday as he pleaded not guilty to dangerous driving and criminal negligence causing death in the Sept. 1, 2016 collision that killed 23-year-old cyclist Nusrat Jahan.
Berg said he was “somewhat surprised to receive (charter) materials on the eve of the trial,” he said Friday, though the judge noted he was “not assigning blame (or) pointing fingers.”
The case went through two separate judicial pretrials, and the Crown said the issue of a charter challenge over trial delay was discussed for the first time in a pretrial conference on June 14, one week before Conley’s trial was set to begin.
If Berg rules in favour of the defence, he will hear the merits of the charter arguments Tuesday.
The July 2016 Supreme Court ruling places a ceiling of 18 months from the time charges are laid to the time the case reaches trial in Ontario Court cases, while placing a 30-month limit on Superior Court cases.
Those Superior Court challenges have attracted controversy and considerably higher profile — notably in Ottawa the Adam Picard murder case, which is set for a second trial after a successful charter challenge set Picard free, and was then overturned on appeal.
In Conley’s case, the defence calculates the gap between charges and trial at 22 months seven days.
The Crown argued it was in part a “defence-created delay,” and calculated the gap at just over 14 months, within the 18-month ceiling prescribed in the Supreme Court’s Jordan decision.
Ramsay further argued the defence missed the deadline in filing the charter application and gave “no cogent reason” for the late filing.
“The principle (for permitting a late charter application) is that a cogent reason must be put forward,” Ramsay said. “No reason has been provided (by the defence). Not a cogent reason. No reason at all.”
Lamb acknowledged in court it was an error that led to a delay in returning correspondence with the Crown.
Ramsay told the judge he had sent emails and text messages to the defence team inquiring about whether they would pursue a Jordan application, but said he received no reply.
Lamb countered that the Crown should have been prepared for a forthcoming Jordan application once the case crossed the 18-month threshold.
One remedy would be an adjournment to deal with the charter application on its own, but Ramsay noted the “cascading effect” such an adjournment could have on the courthouse schedule.
As Berg noted Friday, the Supreme Court ruling was intended to help clear up a logjammed court system.
“It is notorious not just in Ottawa but in other jurisdictions (across Canada). It takes a long time to come to trial because of a lack of judges and courtrooms,” Berg said.
“There’s been a number of new judges appointed (since the 2016 decision). I’m one of them.”
ahelmer@postmedia.com
Twitter.com/helmera
查看原文...
Ontario Court Justice David Berg will make his ruling Tuesday on whether to allow Conley’s defence to pursue a late-filed application under Section 11b of the charter, now commonly known as a Jordan application, named after the 2016 Supreme Court of Canada ruling.
The defence tandem of Dominic Lamb and Fady Mansour filed notice in May it sought to dismiss the charges under the charter challenge, while Crown prosecutor John Ramsay argued in court Friday the defence missed the court deadline in filing its charter application.
According to provincial court rules, the charter application must be filed 90 days ahead of the trial. The defence filed notice of the application with the Crown on May 25. It was stamped and court-certified on June 18.
Conley’s trial began Monday as he pleaded not guilty to dangerous driving and criminal negligence causing death in the Sept. 1, 2016 collision that killed 23-year-old cyclist Nusrat Jahan.
Berg said he was “somewhat surprised to receive (charter) materials on the eve of the trial,” he said Friday, though the judge noted he was “not assigning blame (or) pointing fingers.”
The case went through two separate judicial pretrials, and the Crown said the issue of a charter challenge over trial delay was discussed for the first time in a pretrial conference on June 14, one week before Conley’s trial was set to begin.
If Berg rules in favour of the defence, he will hear the merits of the charter arguments Tuesday.
The July 2016 Supreme Court ruling places a ceiling of 18 months from the time charges are laid to the time the case reaches trial in Ontario Court cases, while placing a 30-month limit on Superior Court cases.
Those Superior Court challenges have attracted controversy and considerably higher profile — notably in Ottawa the Adam Picard murder case, which is set for a second trial after a successful charter challenge set Picard free, and was then overturned on appeal.
In Conley’s case, the defence calculates the gap between charges and trial at 22 months seven days.
The Crown argued it was in part a “defence-created delay,” and calculated the gap at just over 14 months, within the 18-month ceiling prescribed in the Supreme Court’s Jordan decision.
Ramsay further argued the defence missed the deadline in filing the charter application and gave “no cogent reason” for the late filing.
“The principle (for permitting a late charter application) is that a cogent reason must be put forward,” Ramsay said. “No reason has been provided (by the defence). Not a cogent reason. No reason at all.”
Lamb acknowledged in court it was an error that led to a delay in returning correspondence with the Crown.
Ramsay told the judge he had sent emails and text messages to the defence team inquiring about whether they would pursue a Jordan application, but said he received no reply.
Lamb countered that the Crown should have been prepared for a forthcoming Jordan application once the case crossed the 18-month threshold.
One remedy would be an adjournment to deal with the charter application on its own, but Ramsay noted the “cascading effect” such an adjournment could have on the courthouse schedule.
As Berg noted Friday, the Supreme Court ruling was intended to help clear up a logjammed court system.
“It is notorious not just in Ottawa but in other jurisdictions (across Canada). It takes a long time to come to trial because of a lack of judges and courtrooms,” Berg said.
“There’s been a number of new judges appointed (since the 2016 decision). I’m one of them.”
ahelmer@postmedia.com
Twitter.com/helmera
查看原文...
