R. v. Dupuis (J.A.), (2001) 202 Sask.R. 182 (QB)

• Judge: McIntyre, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: February 19, 2001
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2001), 202 Sask.R. 182 (QB);2001 SKQB 92

R. v. Dupuis (J.A.) (2001), 202 Sask.R. 182 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] Sask.R. TBEd. FE.092

Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Joseph Arthur Dupuis (applicant)

(2001 B.A. No. 2; 2001 SKQB 92)

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

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Regina

McIntyre, J.

February 19, 2001.

Summary:

The accused was serving a conditional sentence for charges under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA). He was charged with further offences under the CDSA and as a result he was also charged with breaching the conditions of the con­ditional sentence order. At a show cause hearing, the Provincial Court Judge con­cluded that it was not in the public interest to release the accused. The accused sought a review of the order under which he was detained in custody.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench ordered that the accused be released upon his entering into an undertaking on certain conditions.

Criminal Law - Topic 3304.1

Compelling appearance, detention and release - Interim release or detention of accused pending trial or appeal - Detention necessary to maintain confidence in the administration of justice - The accused was serving a conditional sentence for charges under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA) - He was charged with further offences under the CDSA and as a result he was also charged with breaching the conditions of the conditional sentence order - At a show cause hearing, the Pro­vincial Court Judge concluded that it was not in the public interest to release the accused - The accused sought a review of the order - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that the accused's detention was not necessary to ensure his attendance in court or for the protection of the public (Criminal Code, ss. 515(10)(a) and (b)) and that the issue was whether the accused's detention was justified under the tertiary ground in s. 515(10)(c) in order to maintain confidence in the administration of justice - The court stated that there might be circumstances where detention on the tertiary ground was justified where someone committed further offences while serving a conditional sentence, but in the circumstances of this case, the accused's detention was not justified on the tertiary ground - The accused was ordered released upon entering into an undertaking on certain conditions.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Morales (M.), [1992] 3 S.C.R. 711; 144 N.R. 176; 51 Q.A.C. 161; 77 C.C.C.(3d) 91; 17 C.R.(4th) 74; 12 C.R.R.(2d) 31, refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Blind (D.E.) (1999), 180 Sask.R. 145; 205 W.A.C. 145; 139 C.C.C.(3d) 87 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. MacDougal (R.A.) (1999), 128 B.C.A.C. 281; 208 W.A.C. 281; 138 C.C.C.(3d) 38 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 515(10)(c) [para. 4].

Counsel:

W.E. McBride, for Her Majesty the Queen;

B.P. Nychuk, for Joseph Arthur Dupuis.

This application was heard before McIn­tyre, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Regina, who delivered the following decision on February 19, 2001.