R. v. Jensen (C.K.), 2014 ABCA 435

• Judge: Wakeling, J.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: November 27, 2014
• Citations: 2014 ABCA 435;(2014), 588 A.R. 234

R. v. Jensen (C.K.) (2014), 588 A.R. 234; 626 W.A.C. 234 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2014] A.R. TBEd. DE.092

Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Cody Kyle Jensen (applicant)

(1403-0231-A; 2014 ABCA 435)

Indexed As: R. v. Jensen (C.K.)

Alberta Court of Appeal

Wakeling, J.A.

December 15, 2014.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to four years' imprisonment. The accused appealed against conviction and sentence and applied under s. 679(3) of the Criminal Code for release pending his appeal.

The Alberta Court of Appeal, per Wakeling, J.A., dismissed the application. The appeal was not frivolous and the court was satisfied that the accused would surrender himself into custody if the appeal was dismissed. However, the accused failed to establish that his detention was not necessary in the public interest.

Criminal Law - Topic 3310

Compelling appearance, detention and release - Interim release or detention of accused pending trial or appeal - Release pending appeal - The 21 year old accused was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to four years' imprisonment - The accused confronted a noisy group of intoxicated males in an adjacent motel room after their noise woke him up - One of the males swung a chair at the accused - The accused retreated to his room - The males broke down the door - The accused stabbed one of the males with a knife, causing his death - The trial judge found that the accused used more force than was necessary, as he could have exited the room through the open door - The accused appealed against conviction and sentence and applied under s. 679(3) of the Criminal Code for release pending his appeal - The Alberta Court of Appeal, per Wakeling, J.A., dismissed the application - Although the appeal was not frivolous and the court was satisfied that the accused would surrender himself into custody if the appeal was dismissed, the accused failed to establish that his detention was not necessary in the public interest - The court stated that "the public's respect for the administration of justice would be diminished if a court released a person convicted of a serious criminal offence, pending appeal, unless it was more likely than not that his appeal would succeed. ... The prospects his appeal will succeed are not high enough to justify granting bail pending appeal.".

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Latimer (R.W.) (1994), 128 Sask.R. 63; 85 W.A.C. 63 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14, footnote 4].

Can v. Calgary Chief of Police et al. (2014), 584 A.R. 147; 623 W.A.C. 147; 2014 ABCA 322, refd to. [para. 17, footnote 6].

R. v. C.E., [2013] A.R. Uned. 236; 2013 ABCA 284, refd to. [para. 18, footnote 8].

R. v. Demyen (1975), 26 C.C.C.(2d) 324 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 18, footnote 8].

R. v. Branco (C.) (1993), 35 B.C.A.C. 201; 57 W.A.C. 201; 87 C.C.C.(3d) 71 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 18, footnote 9].

R. v. Carriere (D.M.), [2014] 1 W.W.R. 117; 573 A.R. 250 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 20, footnote 11].

Whidden v. Abbott (1935), 160 So. 475 (Fla.), refd to. [para. 21, footnote 12].

R. v. J.T.S. (1996), 193 A.R. 35; 135 W.A.C. 35; 112 C.C.C.(3d) 184 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 21, footnote 13].

R. v. K.D.L., [2014] A.R. Uned. 179; 2014 ABCA 248, refd to. [para. 22, footnote 15].

R. v. Rhyason (B.P.) (2006), 384 A.R. 146; 367 W.A.C. 146; 208 C.C.C.(3d) 193; 2006 ABCA 120, refd to. [para. 22, footnote 15].

R. v. Ponak, [1972] 4 W.W.R. 316 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 22, footnote 15].

R. v. Hanna (K.D.) (1992), 3 B.C.A.C. 57; 7 W.A.C. 57 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 23, footnote 16].

R. v. McNaughton (S.D.) (2010), 487 A.R. 130; 495 W.A.C. 130 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 23, footnote 17].

R. v. Farinacci (L.W.) et al. (1993), 67 O.A.C. 197; 86 C.C.C.(3d) 32 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 29, footnote 22].

R. v. Mapara (S.) (2001), 156 B.C.A.C. 138; 255 W.A.C. 138; 158 C.C.C.(3d) 312 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 29, footnote 22].

R. v. Nguyen (Y.V.) (1997), 97 B.C.A.C. 86; 157 W.A.C. 86; 119 C.C.C.(3d) 269 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 29, footnote 22].

R. v. Langlois (M.J.), [2014] A.R. Uned. 383; 2014 ABCA 351, refd to. [para. 29, footnote 24].

R. v. Colville (D.) (2003), 327 A.R. 143; 296 W.A.C. 143 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 29, footnote 25].

R. v. Fox (J.L.), [2000] A.R. Uned. 403; 2000 ABCA 283, refd to. [para. 29, footnote 25].

R. v. Pabani (1991), 10 C.R.(4th) 381 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 29, footnote 25].

R. v. J.R.P., [2014] A.R. Uned. 180; 2014 ABCA 251, refd to. [para. 35, footnote 29].

R. v. Hall, 2014 ABCA 401, refd to. [para. 36, footnote 31].

RJR-Macdonald Inc. et Imperial Tobacco Ltd. v. Canada (Procureur général), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 312; 164 N.R. 1; 60 Q.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 36, footnote 32].

R. v. Lyons, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 309; 80 N.R. 161; 82 N.S.R.(2d) 271; 207 A.P.R. 271, refd to. [para. 36, footnote 32].

R. v. Alcantara (J.R.) et al. (2014), 577 A.R. 381; 613 W.A.C. 381; 2014 ABCA 255, refd to. [para. 36, footnote 34].

R. v. Knapczyk - see R. v. Alcantara (J.R.) et al.

R. v. Lenny (R.D.) et al. (1995), 178 A.R. 142; 110 W.A.C. 142 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 36, footnote 34].

R. v. Louangrath, 2014 ONCA 880, refd to. [para. 38, footnote 38].

R. v. Effert (K.A.) (2009), 460 A.R. 302; 462 W.A.C. 302; 2009 ABCA 267, refd to. [para. 38, footnote 38].

R. v. Burd (W.S.), [2005] B.C.A.C. Uned. 175; 2005 BCCA 620, refd to. [para. 38, footnote 38].

R. v. Ouellette (T.W.), [2005] A.R. Uned. 10; 2005 ABCA 57, refd to. [para. 41, footnote 41].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Bail: An Ancient Practice Reexamined (1961), 70 Yale L.J. 966, p. 970 [para. 19, footnote 10].

Berger, Criminal Appeals as Jury Control: An Anglo-Canadian Historical Perspective on the Rise of Criminal Appeals (2005), 10 Can. Crim. L. Rev. 1, pp. 35 to 40 [para. 21, footnote 12].

Del Buono, Vincent M., The Right to Appeal in Indictable Cases; A Legislative History (1978), 16 Alta. L. Rev. 446, generally [para. 21, footnoe 12].

Packer, Herbert, Two Models of Criminal Process (1964), 113 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1, p. 41 [para. 17, footnoe 7].

Counsel:

M.J. McGuire, for the respondent;

M.T. Duckett, Q.C., for the applicant.

This application was heard on November 27, 2014, before Wakeling, J.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal, who delivered the following judgment on December 15, 2014.