R. v. Checkosis (C.V.), (1999) 190 Sask.R. 134 (ProvCt)

JudgeKolenick, P.C.J.
CourtProvincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
Case DateOctober 04, 1999
JurisdictionSaskatchewan
Citations(1999), 190 Sask.R. 134 (ProvCt)

R. v. Checkosis (C.V.) (1999), 190 Sask.R. 134 (ProvCt)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] Sask.R. TBEd. FE.016

Her Majesty the Queen v. Carl Vincent Checkosis (No. 2)

(Information No. 38762932)

Indexed As: R. v. Checkosis (C.V.)

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Kolenick, P.C.J.

October 4, 1999.

Summary:

A police officer on patrol mistook Chec­kosis for a known prohibited driver, and stopped the vehicle he was driving. When the officer noticed his mistake, he explained the situation to Checkosis, but then asked him to identify himself and to produce his driver's license. Checkosis provided a false name. He was charged with wilful obstruc­tion of a peace officer engaged in the lawful execution of his duty. The issues at trial were whether Checkosis had been arbitrarily detained contrary to s. 9 of the Charter, and whether the officer was engaged in the lawful execution of his duty after realizing his mistake.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court ruled that once the mistake was realized, what followed was an arbitrary detention and the officer was no longer engaged in the lawful execution of his duty. The acused was found not guilty.

Civil Rights - Topic 3603

Detention and imprisonment - Detention - What constitutes arbitrary detention - A police officer on patrol mistook Checkosis for a known prohibited driver, and stopped the vehicle he was driving - When the officer noticed his mistake, he explained the situation to Checkosis, but then asked him to identify himself and to produce his driver's license - Checkosis provided a false name - He was charged with wilful obstruction of a peace officer engaged in the lawful execution of his duty - An issue at trial was whether Checkosis had been arbitrarily detained contrary to s. 9 of the Charter - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court ruled that once the mistake was realized, what followed was an arbitrary detention and admission of the evidence of obstruction would render the trial unfair - See paragraphs 6 to 10.

Police - Topic 3109

Powers - Investigation - Motor vehicles - A police officer on patrol mistook Chec­kosis for a known prohibited driver, and stopped the vehicle he was driving - When the officer noticed his mistake, he explained the situation to Checkosis, but then asked him to identify himself and to produce his driver's license - Checkosis provided a false name - He was charged with wilful obstruction of a peace officer engaged in the lawful execution of his duty - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court ruled that once the mistake was realized, the officer was no longer engaged in the law­ful execution of his duty - See para­graphs 11 to 14.

Police - Topic 3109

Powers - Investigation - Motor vehicles - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3603 ].

Police - Topic 3204

Powers - Direction - Stopping vehicles -General - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3603 and Police - Topic 3109 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Lott (E.C.) (1998), 174 Sask.R. 133; 38 M.V.R.(3d) 140 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Duncanson (1991), 93 Sask.R. 193; 4 W.A.C. 193; 30 M.V.R.(2d) 17 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Green (L.R.) (1995), 132 Sask.R. 192 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Stillman (W.W.D.), [1997] 1 S.C.R. 607; 209 N.R. 81; 185 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 472 A.P.R. 1; 5 C.R.(5th) 1, appld. [para. 10]

R. v. L.S.L. (1991), 89 Sask.R. 267 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 11].

Statutes Noticed:

Highway Traffic Act, S.S. 1986, c. H-3.1, sect. 20(1), sect. 40(8), sect. 40(9) [para. 6].

Counsel:

Kimberley Humphries, for the Crown;

Donald MacKinnon, for the accused.

This matter was heard by Kolenick, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on October 4, 1999.

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 practice notes
  • R. v. Houben,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
    • May 18, 2006
    ...321 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 7]. R. v. Lott (E.C.) (1998), 174 Sask.R. 133 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 7]. R. v. Checkosis (C.V.) (1999), 190 Sask.R. 134; 49 M.V.R.(3d) 303 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. R. v. Duncanson (1991), 93 Sask.R. 193; 4 W.A.C. 193; 12 C.R.(4th) 86 (C.A.), refd to. [para. ......
  • R. v. Uhryn (L.M.), 2003 SKPC 166
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • December 16, 2003
    ...27, footnote 9]. R. v. Hunter (S.E.) (2003), 229 Sask.R. 286 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 27, footnote 9]. R. v. Checkosis (C.V.) (1999), 190 Sask.R. 134; 49 M.V.R.(3d) 303 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 27, footnote R. v. L.S.L. (1991), 89 Sask.R. 267 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 27, footnote 10]......
  • R. v. McDonald (W.), (2001) 224 Sask.R. 235 (PC)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • December 18, 2001
    ...86 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13]. R. v. Rost (K.O.) (1999), 176 Sask.R. 260 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 13]. R. v. Checkosis (C.V.) (1999), 190 Sask.R. 134 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 13]. R. v. Lott (E.C.) (1999), 174 Sask.R. 133 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 13]. R. v. Leclair and Ross (1989), 91 N.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
8 cases
  • R. v. Houben,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
    • May 18, 2006
    ...321 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 7]. R. v. Lott (E.C.) (1998), 174 Sask.R. 133 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 7]. R. v. Checkosis (C.V.) (1999), 190 Sask.R. 134; 49 M.V.R.(3d) 303 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. R. v. Duncanson (1991), 93 Sask.R. 193; 4 W.A.C. 193; 12 C.R.(4th) 86 (C.A.), refd to. [para. ......
  • R. v. Uhryn (L.M.), 2003 SKPC 166
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • December 16, 2003
    ...27, footnote 9]. R. v. Hunter (S.E.) (2003), 229 Sask.R. 286 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 27, footnote 9]. R. v. Checkosis (C.V.) (1999), 190 Sask.R. 134; 49 M.V.R.(3d) 303 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 27, footnote R. v. L.S.L. (1991), 89 Sask.R. 267 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 27, footnote 10]......
  • R. v. McDonald (W.), (2001) 224 Sask.R. 235 (PC)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • December 18, 2001
    ...86 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13]. R. v. Rost (K.O.) (1999), 176 Sask.R. 260 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 13]. R. v. Checkosis (C.V.) (1999), 190 Sask.R. 134 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 13]. R. v. Lott (E.C.) (1999), 174 Sask.R. 133 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 13]. R. v. Leclair and Ross (1989), 91 N.......
  • R. v. Houben (K.), (2004) 246 Sask.R. 34 (PC)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • March 5, 2004
    ...321 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16]. R. v. Lott (E.C.) (1998), 174 Sask.R. 133 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 16]. R. v. Checkosis (C.V.) (1999), 190 Sask.R. 134; 49 M.V.R.(3d) 303 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. R. v. Ladouceur, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1257; 108 N.R. 171; 40 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 16]. R. v.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT