R. v. Bowser (J.W.) et al., (2016) 373 N.S.R.(2d) 201 (PC)

• Judge: Tax, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: April 14, 2016
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (2016), 373 N.S.R.(2d) 201 (PC);2016 NSPC 34

R. v. Bowser (J.W.) (2016), 373 N.S.R.(2d) 201 (PC);

    1175 A.P.R. 201

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2016] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. MY.029

Her Majesty the Queen v. Joseph Wayne Bowser and Ricky Daniel Cameron

(2379172-73; 2379175-76; 2016 NSPC 34)

Indexed As: R. v. Bowser (J.W.) et al.

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Tax, P.C.J.

April 14, 2016.

Summary:

In October 2011, the accused (Bowser and Cameron) were jointly charged with possession of stolen property exceeding $5,000. Bowser was also charged with break, enter and theft of property exceeding $5,000 and Cameron was charged with theft of property exceeding $5,000. The accused elected trial by Provincial Court judge and entered not guilty pleas in September 2012. Trial evidence commenced in July 2013 and concluded in July 2015. The accused applied under s. 24(1) of the Charter for a stay of proceedings on the ground that their s. 11(b) Charter right to be tried within a reasonable time was infringed.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court dismissed the application. There were no unreasonable delays prejudicing the accused.

Civil Rights - Topic 3265

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - What constitutes "within a reasonable time" - In October 2011, the accused (Bowser and Cameron) were jointly charged with possession of stolen property exceeding $5,000 - Bowser was also charged with break, enter and theft and Cameron was charged with theft - They elected trial by Provincial Court judge and entered not guilty pleas in September 2012 - A three day trial was scheduled for July 2013 - Both the accused and the Crown advised that three days would be sufficient - It was not - Ten more trial days were required - The trial evidence concluded in July 2015 - The accused chose not to testify - The trial judge granted the Crown's request for written submissions respecting the factual and legal issues - The accused indicated that they would be applying for a stay of proceedings under s. 24(1) of the Charter on the ground that their right to be tried within a reasonable time (s. 11(b)) had been infringed and requested that the two matters be heard at the same time - Transcripts required for the hearing were not received until December 2015 - The Charter application was heard in February 2016 - Most of the delay (24 months to complete 13 days of trial evidence) was caused by underestimating the trial days required - The accused argued that this delay was solely attributable to the Crown, as it had the sole responsibility of properly estimating the required number of trial days - The accused conceded that had the trial evidence been completed within the three scheduled trial days there would not have been an unreasonable delay contrary to s. 11(b) - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court dismissed the Charter application - The estimation of required trial days was not the sole responsibility of the Crown - The Crown and the accused's counsel shared responsibility for the inaccurate estimate - Respecting the 54 month delay between October 2011 and April 2016, 13.5 months' delay (including 8.5 months' institutional delay) was attributable to the Crown, 7.5 months' delay attributable to the accused, and 33.25 months's delay was attributable to the inherent time requirements of this complex circumstantial case - There was "no unreasonable periods of delay, causing prejudice, in this case" - There was a strong societal interest in having the charges adjudicated.

Civil Rights - Topic 3270

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - Evidence of prejudice and causes of delay - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3265 ].

Counsel:

Peter Craig, for the Crown;

Bernard Thibault, for Joseph Wayne Bowser;

Patricia Jones, for Ricky Daniel Cameron.

This application was heard at Dartmouth, N.S., before Tax, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on April 14, 2016.