R. v. Coon (R.), (2015) 322 Man.R.(2d) 107 (QB)

• Judge: Schulman, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: October 29, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (2015), 322 Man.R.(2d) 107 (QB);2015 MBQB 172

R. v. Coon (R.) (2015), 322 Man.R.(2d) 107 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. NO.016

Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. Roger Coon (accused/respondent)

(CR 15-01-34449; 2015 MBQB 172)

Indexed As: R. v. Coon (R.)

Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

Winnipeg Centre

Schulman, J.

October 29, 2015.

Summary:

The accused was charged with speeding in a construction zone (s. 95(1)(b.1), Highway Traffic Act). The enforcement photo showed that he was close to the sign that indicated the construction zone's end. A judicial justice of the peace acquitted the accused, indicating that the end sign was not "fairly posted" and that it was not "fair ... to target people once they're already past the construction". The Crown appealed.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench allowed the appeal, entering a conviction. The accused was granted an absolute discharge.

Motor Vehicles - Topic 2616

Regulation of vehicles and traffic - Rate of speed - General - Construction zone - The accused was charged with speeding in a construction zone (s. 95(1)(b.1), Highway Traffic Act) - The enforcement photo showed that he was close to the sign that indicated the construction zone's end - A judicial justice of the peace (JJP) acquitted the accused, indicating that the end sign was not "fairly posted" and that it was not "fair ... to target people once they're already past the construction" - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench allowed the Crown's appeal - The Act required drivers to slow down when construction signs were present, whether or not equipment or workers were present - Drivers could not properly increase their speed until they passed the "end of construction" sign - The JJP could not nullify the sign's effect based on her view of fairness - All of the offence's elements were proven beyond a reasonable doubt - Nothing rebutted the presumption of the proper erection of signs - The JJP erred in law in acquitting the accused - A conviction was entered - See paragraphs 1 to 16.

Motor Vehicles - Topic 2680

Regulation of vehicles and traffic - Rate of speed - Evidence and proof - Evidence - Signs regulating speed - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 2616 ].

Trials - Topic 2662

Verdicts and discharges - Discharge - When available - The accused was charged with speeding in a construction zone (s. 95(1)(b.1), Highway Traffic Act (HTA)) - The enforcement photo showed that he was close to the sign that indicated the construction zone's end - A judicial justice of the peace (JJP) acquitted the accused, indicating that the end sign was not "fairly posted" and that it was not "fair ... to target people once they're already past the construction" - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench allowed the Crown's appeal, entering a conviction - The JJP erred in law in acquitting the accused - However, s. 254(1) of the HTA and s. 7(1) of the Summary Convictions Act gave a JJP the authority to grant an absolute discharge where the offence occurred under circumstances not wholly attributable to the accused's fault - Here, the JJP's concern that the accused might have been misled coupled with her acceptance of his evidence supported such a finding - The court granted an absolute discharge - See paragraph 17.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Sneyd (N.) (2009), 246 Man.R.(2d) 214; 2009 MBQB 272, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Aldor (M.) (2005), 191 Man.R.(2d) 203; 2005 MBQB 35, refd to. [para. 17].

Counsel:

Dayna Queau-Guzzi, for the Crown;

R. Coon, appeared in person.

This appeal was heard by Schulman, J., of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Winnipeg Centre, who delivered the following judgment on October 29, 2015.