R. v. Hill, (1987) 57 Sask.R. 234 (QB)

• Judge: Maher, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: May 15, 1987
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1987), 57 Sask.R. 234 (QB)

R. v. Hill (1987), 57 Sask.R. 234 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Norman Ray Hill v. Her Majesty The Queen

(Q.B. No. 74 1986 J.C. Saskatoon)

Indexed As: R. v. Hill

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Maher, J.

May 15, 1987.

Summary:

The accused was charged with second degree murder. Following a preliminary inquiry the Provincial Court judge held there was insufficient evidence to convict on the murder charge, but ordered that he stand trial on the included offence of manslaughter. Subsequently, the Attorney General preferred an indictment charging the accused with second degree murder. The accused applied to quash the second degree murder indictment, arguing, inter alia, that a preferred indictment could not be laid against him where he was not discharged at preliminary and the laying of the indictment violated his s. 7 Charter rights (i.e. was contrary to the principles of fundamental justice).

Civil Rights - Topic 3132

Trials - Due process - Fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal proceedings - Right to be heard - The Attorney General preferred a second degree murder indictment against an accused following a preliminary hearing - The accused argued that there was a s. 7 Charter violation because he was denied an opportunity to make representations to the Attorney General before the indictment was preferred and the Attorney General did not exercise his discretion judicially - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench rejected the accused's arguments, holding that the laying of the preferred indictment was not contrary to s. 7 of the Charter - See paragraphs 16 to 27.

Civil Rights - Topic 8402

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Criminal proceedings - Preferring indictments - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3132 above].

Criminal Law - Topic 4262

Procedure - Indictments - Preferring of - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3132 above].

Criminal Law - Topic 4262

Procedure - Indictments - Preferring of - An accused was charged with second degree murder - Following a preliminary inquiry the accused was committed to stand trial only on the included offence of manslaughter - Subsequently the Attorney General preferred an indictment charging the accused with second degree murder - The accused applied to quash the indictment, alleging that the Attorney General lacked jurisdiction to prefer an indictment where the accused had not been discharged at the preliminary hearing (Criminal Code R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, ss. 504(1), 507) - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench disagreed that the Attorney General lacked authority to prefer such an indictment under ss. 504(1) and 507 - The court held in any event, that the committal for trial for manslaughter constituted a discharge for the second degree murder offence - See paragraphs 1 to 15.

Cases Noticed:

St. Jean v. R. (1978), 7 C.R.(3d) 14, folld. [para. 14].

R. v. Dahlem (1983), 25 Sask.R. 10, folld. [para. 17].

Balderstone v. R. and Manitoba, Attorney General of et al. (1982), 19 Man.R.(2d) 321; 2 C.C.C.(3d) 37, folld. [para. 17].

R. v. Moore (1986), 39 Man.R.(2d) 315; 26 C.C.C.(3d) 474, folld. [para. 20].

Operation Dismantle Inc. et al. v. Canada et al., [1985] 1 S.C.R. 441; 59 N.R. 1, consd. [para. 20].

R. v. Kevork et al. (1986), 27 C.C.C.(3d) 271, folld. [para. 21].

R. v. Canada Packers Inc. and Intercontinental Packers Limited (1986), 71 A.R. 173, folld. [para. 22].

Re Patrick et al. and Attorney-General of Canada (1986), 28 C.C.C.(3d) 4, folld. [para. 24].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, sect. 7 [paras. 16-27].

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 2 [para. 11]; sect. 218(1) [para. 1]; sect. 475 [para. 8]; sect. 504(1), sect. 507 [para. 10]; sect. 574(5) [para. 4].

Counsel:

J. Nightingale, for the Crown;

S.E. Halyk, Q.C., and J. Watson, for the accused (applicant).

This application was heard before Maher, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following decision on May 15, 1987: