R. v. Howie (M.J.)

• Jurisdiction: Alberta
• Court: Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
• Judge: Semenuk, P.C.J.
• Citation: (2013), 574 A.R. 197 (PC),2013 ABPC 288
• Date: 05 November 2013

R. v. Howie (M.J.) (2013), 574 A.R. 197 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] A.R. TBEd. NO.052

Her Majesty the Queen v. Michael James Howie (130074958P1; 2013 ABPC 288)

Indexed As: R. v. Howie (M.J.)

Alberta Provincial Court

Semenuk, P.C.J.

November 5, 2013.

Summary:

The accused was charged with impaired driving offences. He applied for a stay of proceedings under s. 24(1) of the Charter on the grounds that his ss. 7 and 11(b) Charter rights were violated. Specifically, he submitted that there had been an unreasonable delay in bringing the case to trial because of the Crown's persistent delay in making full disclosure, and the accused's resulting inability to make full answer and defence.

The Alberta Provincial Court granted the application.

Civil Rights - Topic 3130

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal and quasi-criminal proceedings - Delay (Charter, s. 7) - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3264 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 3133

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal and quasi-criminal proceedings - Right of accused to make full answer and defence - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3264 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 3264

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - Denial of right - Howie was charged with impaired driving offences - The information was sworn in January 2013 - The trial was scheduled for July 2013 but was adjourned to August 2013 and then September 2013 because of the Crown's failure to fully respond to Howie's repeated requests for disclosure - In October 2013, the trial was adjourned again because the Crown was late in complying with a court order to make disclosure by a specified date - The disclosure was also incomplete, such that a defence expert was unable to form an opinion based on affidavits from police officers that the Crown had filed - The next available date for a two day trial was in June 2014 - Howie applied for a stay of proceedings under s. 24(1) of the Charter on the grounds that his ss. 7 and 11(b) rights were violated - The Alberta Provincial Court granted the application - There was an unreasonable delay in bringing this matter to trial, none of which was attributable to Howie - The lack of institutional resources in being unable to accommodate a two day trial between October 2013 and June 2014 weighed against the Crown - The Crown breached Howie's s. 7 right to timely and complete disclosure and impaired his ability to make full answer and defence at trial - Howie had suffered actual and inferred prejudice - His job as an IT manager required him to travel to work after hours in case of system problems - As a result of an indefinite licence suspension, his commute had increased from three hours to 15 hours per week, and he had to delegate some of his work to less qualified people - This resulted in stress that extended to his personal life and his relationship with his wife.

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 3264 ].

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 - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3264 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8374

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Stay of proceedings - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3264 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 128

General principles - Rights of accused - Right to make full answer and defence - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3264 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4505

Procedure - Trial - Special duties of Crown - Duty to disclose evidence prior to trial - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3264 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Smith (M.H.), [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1120; 102 N.R. 205; 63 Man.R.(2d) 81, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Askov, Hussey, Melo and Gugliotta, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1199; 113 N.R. 241; 42 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Morin (1992), 134 N.R. 321; 53 O.A.C. 241; 71 C.C.C.(3d) 1 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Godin (M.) (2009), 389 N.R. 1; 252 O.A.C. 377; 2009 SCC 26, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Holt (1991), 117 A.R. 218; 2 W.A.C. 218 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Koruz et al. (1992), 125 A.R. 161; 14 W.A.C. 161; 72 C.C.C.(3d) 353 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Heikel and Sutton (1992), 125 A.R. 298; 14 W.A.C. 298; 72 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 1992 ABCA 142, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Henkel (J.E.) et al. (2003), 320 A.R. 206; 288 W.A.C. 206; 2003 ABCA 23, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Yelle (J.) et al. (2006), 384 A.R. 331; 367 W.A.C. 331; 2006 ABCA 160, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Nethery (M.E.) (2004), 374 A.R. 124; 2004 ABPC 198, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Vo (T.) (2005), 393 A.R. 225; 2005 ABPC 371, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Morasch (S.R.), [2013] A.R. Uned. 311; 2013 ABPC 63, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Williamson (K.) (2000), 132 O.A.C. 92; 2000 CarswellOnt 1383 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Pighin (B.C.), [2006] A.R. Uned. 643; 2006 ABPC 280, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Y.E. (2006), 402 A.R. 390; 2006 ABPC 187, refd to. [para. 14].

Gonzalez v. Driver Control Board (Alta.) et al. (2003), 330 A.R. 262; 299 W.A.C. 262; 2003 ABCA 256, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Bjelland (J.C.) (2009), 391 N.R. 202; 460 A.R. 230; 462 W.A.C. 230; 2009 SCC 38, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. MacDougall (P.A.) (1998), 231 N.R. 147; 168 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 83; 517 A.P.R. 83 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 15].

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. 15].

R. v. Neale, 1996 CarswellAlta 155 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Poskrobko (P.), [2013] A.R. Uned. 665; 2013 ABPC 260, refd to. [para. 15].

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. 15].

R. v. Wolfe (J.D.) (2012), 547 A.R. 300; 2012 ABPC 245, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Chorney (H.Q.) (2008), 435 A.R. 369; 2008 ABPC 32, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Brown (N.K.), [2013] A.R. Uned. 202; 2013 ABPC 50, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Stone (B.T.), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 290; 239 N.R. 201; 123 B.C.A.C. 1; 201 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. So (U.) (2013), 570 A.R. 379; 2013 ABQB 549, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Vetsch (J.A.), [2013] A.R. Uned. 523; 2013 ABPC 194, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Tran (T.H.) (2007), 420 A.R. 175; 2007 ABPC 123, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Nemanic (M.M.), [2009] A.R. Uned. 635; 2009 ABPC 279, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Campbell (C.D.), [2010] A.R. Uned. 878; 2010 ABPC 382, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Ross (D.L.), [2012] A.R. Uned. 382; 2012 ABPC 155, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Valooran (P.P.), [2012] A.R. Uned. 625; 2012 ABPC 246, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Habermehl (R.), [2013] A.R. Uned. 302; 2013 ABPC 43, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Dyck (R.W.) (2013), 564 A.R. 277; 2013 ABPC 165, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Pandher (A.S.), [2013] A.R. Uned. 639; 2013 ABPC 267, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Turnbull (C.B.), [2012] A.R. Uned. 184; 2012 ABPC 45, refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. St-Onge Lamoureux (A.) (2012), 436 N.R. 199; 2012 SCC 57, refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Kilpatrick (D.K.) (2013), 555 A.R. 110; 2013 ABQB 5, leave to appeal denied [2013] A.R. Uned. 160; 2013 ABCA 168, refd to. [para. 28].

Counsel:

A. Voss-Altman, for the Crown;

D. Bourdon, for the accused.

This application was heard before Semenuk, P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, who delivered the following ruling at Calgary, Alberta, on November 5, 2013.