R. v. Couillonneur (A.), (2002) 224 Sask.R. 50 (PC)

• Judge: Nightingale, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: February 08, 2002
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2002), 224 Sask.R. 50 (PC);2002 SKPC 10

R. v. Couillonneur (A.) (2002), 224 Sask.R. 50 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2002] Sask.R. TBEd. SE.054

Her Majesty The Queen, on the Information of Verne Leonard Larson, a Conservation Officer v. Alvin Couillonneur

(2002 SKPC 10)

Indexed As: R. v. Couillonneur (A.)

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Nightingale, P.C.J.

February 8, 2002.

Summary:

An accused charged with eight offences under the Saskatchewan Fisheries Act admitted committing six of the offences, but sought a stay of proceedings on the basis of entrapment by conservation officers.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court found the accused guilty of all eight offences subject to further submissions on the application of the Kienapple principle. The court rejected the entrapment plea.

Criminal Law - Topic 205.1

General principles - Common law defences - Entrapment - Requirement of reasonable suspicion or a bona fide investigation - Following years of community complainants of the illegal fishing and sale of fish by the accused, Conservation officers undertook a sting operation - The accused admitted offences under the Fisheries Act, but sought a stay of proceedings on the basis of entrapment - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court rejected the plea - There was no entrapment where officers had a reasonable suspicion of illegal fishing and merely provided the accused with an opportunity to commit the offences pursuant to a bona fide inquiry - The accused was not induced to commit the offences - The accused was already deeply involved in illegal fishing, was an enthusiastic participant in the offences and was in no way manipulated - The court noted that entrapment was not unavailable for regulatory offences - However, officers were afforded more investigative leeway in regulatory offences than in the context of criminal offences - See paragraphs 41 to 82.

Fish and Game - Topic 1763

Offences - Defences - Entrapment - [See Criminal Law - Topic 205.1 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Kienapple, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 729; 1 N.R. 322; 15 C.C.C.(2d) 524; 26 C.R.N.S. 1; 44 D.L.R.(3d) 351, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Mack, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 903; 90 N.R. 173; 44 C.C.C.(3d) 513, appld. [para. 41].

R. v. Au Canada Monetary Exchange Inc. et al., [1999] B.C.J. No. 455 (S.C.), affd. [2000] B.C.A.C. Uned. 70 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 43].

R. v. Benedetti (R.F.), [1997] 7 W.W.R. 330; 200 A.R. 179; 146 W.A.C. 179 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 48].

R. v. Kereluk (1992), 102 Sask.R. 212 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 48].

R. v. Ahluwalia (B.) (2000), 138 O.A.C. 154 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 48].

R. v. Spiers, [1992] M.J. No. 403 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Charles (M.A.) et al., [1998] 4 C.N.L.R. 172; 159 Sask.R. 126 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 76].

R. v. Ironeagle (H.), [2000] 2 C.N.L.R. 163; 186 Sask.R. 131 (Prov. Ct.), affd. (2000), 202 Sask.R. 268 (Q.B.), dist. [para. 78].

Statutes Noticed:

Fisheries Act (Saskatchewan), S.S. 1994, c. F-16.1, sect. 2(1)(f), sect. 2(1)(i), sect. 13 [para. 3].

Fisheries Act (Saskatchewan) Regulations, Fisheries Regulations, Reg. 1, sect. 2(h), sect. 26, sect. 31(b), sect. 60 [para. 3].

Fisheries Regulations - see Fisheries Act (Saskatchewan) Regulations.

Counsel:

P. Mitch McAdam, for the Crown;

Jacob Tootoosis, for the accused.

This case was heard before Nightingale, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on February 8, 2002.