R. v. Forbes (J.D.), 2015 SKQB 56

• Judge: Megaw, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: February 19, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2015 SKQB 56;(2015), 469 Sask.R. 90 (QB)

R. v. Forbes (J.D.) (2015), 469 Sask.R. 90 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] Sask.R. TBEd. MR.032

Her Majesty the Queen v. Jessica D. Forbes

(2014 QBNJ No. 43; 2015 SKQB 56)

Indexed As: R. v. Forbes (J.D.)

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Regina

Megaw, J.

February 19, 2015.

Summary:

The accused was charged with possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, contrary to s. 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. She was formally charged in March 2012 and the trial was set for March 2015. The accused applied for a stay of proceedings on the basis that her s. 11(b) Charter right to be tried within a reasonable time had been breached.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application.

Civil Rights - Topic 3262

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - Waiver of right - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3270 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 3265

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - What constitutes "within a reasonable time" - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3270 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 3270

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - Evidence of prejudice and causes of delay - Forbes was charged with possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking in March 2012 - Her trial was set for March 2015 - Forbes applied for a stay of proceedings on the basis that her s. 11(b) Charter right to be tried within a reasonable time had been breached - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application - There was no breach of Forbes' s. 11(b) rights - There were three months of inherent delay and 13 months of institutional delay - The five months of delay that was attributable to the Crown was not unreasonable, and was due to an inability to get the required witnesses to attend a re-convened preliminary hearing on an earlier date - The delay was primarily caused by Forbes when she (a) waived nine months by consenting to an adjournment for the purpose of allowing negotiations to be conducted with the view of exonerating her; and (b) failed to promptly and actively pursue her disclosure concerns (six months).

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Pidskalny (W.P.) (2012), 392 Sask.R. 231; 2012 SKQB 114, dist. [para. 17].

R. v. Morin, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771; 134 N.R. 321; 53 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Brassard (S.), [1993] 4 S.C.R. 287; 160 N.R. 247; 58 Q.A.C. 261, refd to. [para. 32].

R. v. Stinchcombe, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 326; 130 N.R. 277; 120 A.R. 161; 8 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 41].

R. v. Anderson (T.) (2011), 387 Sask.R. 305; 2011 SKQB 464, refd to. [para. 42].

R. v. Dixon (S.), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 244; 222 N.R. 243; 166 N.S.R.(2d) 241; 498 A.P.R. 241, refd to. [para. 43].

R. v. Listwan (E.) (1999), 185 Sask.R. 285; 1999 SKQB 100, refd to. [para. 44].

Counsel:

Alan G. McIntyre, Q.C., for the Crown;

Ian D. McKay, Q.C., for the accused.

This application was heard before Megaw, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Regina, who delivered the following judgment on February 19, 2015.