R. v. Klassen, (1980) 1 Sask.R. 419 (CA)

Judge:Woods, Hall and Bayda, JJ.A.
Court:Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan
Case Date:January 17, 1980
Jurisdiction:Saskatchewan
Citations:(1980), 1 Sask.R. 419 (CA)
 
FREE EXCERPT

R. v. Klassen (1980), 1 Sask.R. 419 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Klassen

(Nos. 7418, 6421)

Indexed As: R. v. Klassen

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Woods, Hall and Bayda, JJ.A.

January 17, 1980.

Summary:

This case arose out of an application for preventive detention for an indeterminate period on the ground that an accused was a dangerous sexual offender. The trial judge sentenced the accused to preventive detention. The judgment of the trial judge is set out below - see paragraphs 12 to 41. The accused appealed to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed the sentence of preventive detention. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is set out below - see paragraphs 1 to 11.

A motion for leave to appeal by the accused to the Supreme Court of Canada was dismissed on February 18, 1980 - see Bulletin of Proceedings taken in the Supreme Court of Canada, dated February 22, 1980, at page 3.

Criminal Law - Topic 6558

Preventive detention - Protection of the public - Detention of a dangerous sexual offender - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal and the trial judge referred to the burden of proof and the relevant evidence on an application by the Crown for preventive detention for an indeterminate period under s. 689 of the Criminal Code.

Criminal Law - Topic 6558

Preventive detention - Protection of the public - Detention of a dangerous sexual offender - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to the duty of a trial judge on an application for preventive detention under s. 689 of the Criminal Code - See paragraph 24.

Evidence - Topic 1687

Hearsay rule exceptions - Official statements - Certificates - Notice of intention to offer certificate evidence - What constitutes reasonable notice - Criminal Code, s. 594(3.1) - An accused was not given a copy of a certificate until it was tendered by the Crown at trial - The trial judge offered to adjourn the proceedings for one week, which offer the accused refused, so the trial proceeded - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal held that in the circumstances the accused was given the "reasonable notice" required by s. 594 of the Criminal Code - See paragraphs 4 to 6, 15 and 16.

Cases Noticed:

Wilband v. Reginam (1966), 60 W.W.R. 292, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Neil, [1957] S.C.R. 685; 119 C.C.C. 1, refd to. [paras. 17, 37].

R. v. Tausignant, [1957] O.W.N. 573, refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Pitt (1958), 122 C.C.C. 74, refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Kanester, [1968] 1 C.C.C. 351, refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. McAmmond (1969), 69 W.W.R. 277, refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Wilband, 51 W.W.R. 251; 60 W.W.R. 292, refd to. [paras. 17, 33].

R. v. MacDonald, 9 Crim. L.Q. 239, refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Bolduc, 16 C.C.C.(2d) 280, refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Dwyer, 3 A.R. 96; [1977] 2 W.W.R. 704, refd to. [para. 18].

Subramaniam v. Public Prosecutor, [1956] 1 W.L.R. 965, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. McKenzie, [1965] 3 C.C.C. 6, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Canning, 56 W.W.R. 466, refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Dawson, 71 W.W.R. 455, refd to. [para. 31].

R. v. Lawson, [1974] 6 W.W.R. 625, refd to. [para. 32].

R. v. Leggo, 133 C.C.C. 149, refd to. [para. 37].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 594 [para. 4]; sect. 687 [para. 2]; sect. 689 [para. 14]; sect. 690 [para. 2].

Authors and Works Noticed:

McWilliams, Canadian Criminal Evidence, page 153 [para. 17].

Cross on Evidence (2nd Ed.), page 539 [para. 17].

Counsel:

R.A. Munkler, for the appellant;

S. Kujawa, Q.C., for the Crown.

This appeal was heard by WOODS, HALL and BAYDA, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The judgment of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal was delivered by HALL, J.A., at Regina, Saskatchewan, on January 17, 1980.

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP