R. v. Anderson and Thompson, (1980) 5 Man.R.(2d) 329 (CoCt)

• Court: Provincial Court of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: September 02, 1980
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (1980), 5 Man.R.(2d) 329 (CoCt)

R. v. Anderson (1980), 5 Man.R.(2d) 329 (CoCt)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Anderson and Thompson

Indexed As: R. v. Anderson and Thompson

Manitoba County Court

Judges Criminal Court

Eastern Judicial District

Kennedy, C.C.J.

September 2, 1980.

Summary:

This headnote contains no summary.

Criminal Law - Topic 253

General principles - Abuse of process - What constitutes oppressive or other conduct by Crown constituting abuse of process - The accused were charged with four counts of robbery and various other charges - At a preliminary inquiry, the accused were committed to stand trial on four counts of robbery, one count of mischief and one count of assault causing bodily harm - The accused Anderson elected to plead guilty to various charges and the Crown stayed a remaining nine counts - After the plea by the accused Anderson and the trial of the accused Thompson, a further information was sworn for two counts of break, enter and theft arising out of incidents which occurred on the same date as the previous counts - At the preliminary hearing, defence counsel brought a motion requesting a stay of proceedings of the charges on the ground of abuse of process - The Provincial Judge dismissed the motion and following the preliminary inquiry committed the accused to stand trial on the two counts - At the trial, defence counsel again brought a motion for a stay of proceedings alleging such Crown action constituted an abuse of process, because the accused, if convicted, would be denied the possibility of serving any additional sentence involved concurrent with sentences already imposed - Counsel further alleged in the case of the accused Anderson that by the Crown staying several counts, the accused could have expected that all the matters arising out of the incident were disposed of by the agreement to enter pleas to certain charges in exchange for the stay of proceedings - The Manitoba County Court, Judges Criminal Court for the Eastern Judicial District, dismissed the application - The court stated that it was in a position to review what had been done and to take into account the principle of totality of sentence - The court stated that there is no rule which would prevent the Crown from laying additional charges where an investigation subsequently uncovered additional alleged offences - The court held that the facts, although somewhat unfair to the accused, could not be labelled oppressive, nor did they create manifest hardships warranting the application of the doctrine - See paragraphs 11 to 16.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Rourke (1977), 38 C.R.N.S. 268; 16 N.R. 181; 35 C.C.C.(2d) 129, appld. [para. 13].

R. v. Osborne, 12 C.R.N.S. 1, consd. [para. 13].

Re Ball and The Queen, 44 C.C.C.(2d) 523, consd. [para. 15].

R. v. Catagas (1977), 38 C.C.C.(2d) 296, consd. [para. 14].

Counsel:

D. Melnyk, for the Crown;

B. Sinder, for the accused Anderson;

N. Kravetsky and S. Polinsky, for the accused Thompson.

This case was heard before KENNEDY, C.C.J., of the County Court, Judges Criminal Court for the Eastern Judicial District.

The decision of KENNEDY, C.C.J., was delivered on September 2, 1980: