R. v. Brideau (A.J.), (2015) 433 N.B.R.(2d) 193 (TD)

Judge:Walsh, J.
Court:Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick
Case Date:January 26, 2015
Jurisdiction:New Brunswick
Citations:(2015), 433 N.B.R.(2d) 193 (TD);2015 NBQB 54
 
FREE EXCERPT

R. v. Brideau (A.J.) (2015), 433 N.B.R.(2d) 193 (TD);

    433 R.N.-B.(2e) 193; 1130 A.P.R. 193

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2015] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. MR.020

Renvoi temp.: [2015] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. MR.020

Her Majesty the Queen v. Armand Joseph Brideau

(NCR 12-13; 2015 NBQB 54; 2015 NBBR 54)

Indexed As: R. v. Brideau (A.J.)

Répertorié: R. v. Brideau (A.J.)

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Trial Division

Judicial District of Miramichi

Walsh, J.

January 26, 2015.

Summary:

Résumé:

The accused was committed to trial before a judge and jury on two alleged sexual offences. The court directed that the special issue of the fitness of the accused to stand trial be tried by a jury before the accused was given in charge before another jury for trial on the indictment. The accused's counsel questioned whether it was necessary for the jury hearing the fitness issue to know the nature of the criminal charges his client was facing (i.e., the actual wording on the indictment). Counsel argued that the jury need not know the exact nature of the charges (other than that the accused was charged with criminal offences and, perhaps, the section numbers of the Code) because the jury did not require that information to perform their function to the fullest and the risk of prejudice to the accused was too great (i.e., that the jury would know he was alleged to have committed sexual offences against a female person under the age of 14).

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, concluded that the jury should be apprised of the nature of the charges the accused was facing.

Criminal Law - Topic 92.3

General principles - Mental disorder - General - Preliminary trial of issue of fitness - The accused was committed to trial before a judge and jury on two alleged sexual offences - The court directed that the special issue of the fitness of the accused to stand trial be tried by a jury before the accused was given in charge before another jury for trial on the indictment - The accused's counsel questioned whether it was necessary for the jury hearing the fitness issue to know the nature of the criminal charges his client was facing (i.e., the actual wording on the indictment) - Counsel argued that the jury need not know the exact nature of the charges (other than that the accused was charged with criminal offences and, perhaps, the section numbers of the Code) because, he said, the jury did not require that information to perform their function to the fullest and the risk of prejudice to the accused was too great (i.e., that the jury would know he was alleged to have committed sexual offences against a female person under the age of 14) - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, concluded that the jury should be apprised of the nature of the charges the accused was facing - See paragraphs 1 to 10.

Criminal Law - Topic 92.3

General principles - Mental disorder - General - Preliminary trial of issue of fitness - The accused was committed to trial before a judge and jury on two alleged sexual offences - The court directed that the special issue of the fitness of the accused to stand trial be tried by a jury before the accused was given in charge before another jury for trial on the indictment - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, addressed the issue of whether in selecting the jury the potential jurors would be identified by number or name - The court stated that "The default procedure, as counsel knows, is now to use numbers only (Criminal Code, Section 631). However, subsection 3.1 of the Section provides that a judge may 'if necessary for the proper administration of justice', order the clerk of the court to call out the name and the number on each card. In this case my view is that such an order should be made as it will make for a less cumbersome procedure, make it more 'lawyer friendly' during selection, and there is no reason to believe that this matter or the circumstances surrounding it are such that juror privacy or security is paramount. Indeed, given all of this, it seems to me that the practical benefits and the enhancement of the 'openness principle' would make it necessary for the proper administration of justice to require the juror names to be called" - See paragraph 13.

Criminal Law - Topic 4310.2

Procedure - Jury - Protection of identities of jurors - [See second Criminal Law - Topic 92.3 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 92.3

Principes généraux - Troubles mentaux - Généralités - Instruction préliminaire de la question de l'aptitude de l'accusé à subir son procès (y compris les "déclarations protégées") - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 92.3 ].

Droit criminel - Cote 4310.2

Procédure - Jury - Généralités - Protection de l'identité des jurés - [Voir Criminal Law - Topic 4310.2 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Morrissey (P.) (2007), 230 O.A.C. 141; 227 C.C.C.(3d) 1 (C.A.), dist. [para. 7].

Counsel:

Avocats:

Melanie MacAuley and Michel Allain, for the Crown;

Leslie Matchim, for the accused.

This matter was heard on January 26, 2015, before Walsh, J., of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, Judicial District of Miramichi, who delivered the following oral ruling on the same date.

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP