R. v. L.S.L., (1991) 89 Sask.R. 267 (QB)

• Judge: Baynton, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: January 21, 1991
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1991), 89 Sask.R. 267 (QB)

R. v. L.S.L. (1991), 89 Sask.R. 267 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Her Majesty The Queen v. L.S.L.

(No. 3 A.D. 1990)

Indexed As: R. v. L.S.L.

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of North Battleford

Baynton, J.

January 21, 1991.

Summary:

The accused young offender was acquitted of wilfully obstructing a peace officer in the execution of his duty contrary to s. 129(a) of the Criminal Code. The Crown appealed.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the appeal and entered a conviction.

Criminal Law - Topic 434

Offences against the administration of law and justice - Disobedience and obstruction - Obstruction and resistance of peace officer, in execution of his duty - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to the three elements of the offence of obstruction of a peace officer in the execution of his duty - See paragraph 11.

Criminal Law - Topic 434

Offences against the administration of law and justice - Disobedience and obstruction - Obstruction and resistance of peace officer, in execution of his duty - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to the test of what constituted an "obstruction" of a peace officer in the execution of his duty - Not only must the accused's conduct make it more difficult for an officer to exercise his duty, but the accused must "wilfully" obstruct the officer - It was not necessary to establish an evil intent or bad motive or malice - See paragraphs 21 to 22.

Criminal Law - Topic 434

Offences against the administration of law and justice - Disobedience and obstruction - Obstruction and resistance of peace officer, in execution of his duty - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that simply because the obstruction of the police officer occurs while he was on duty is not sufficient to found a conviction under s. 129(a) of the Criminal Code; the obstruction must relate to the execution by a police officer of his duty - It is, however, unnecessary to show that the officer was at the time of the obstruction engaged in the performance of a specific duty - The court further noted that although a police officer may initially be in the execution of his duty, he will cease to be so once he acts illegally - See paragraphs 14 to 15.

Criminal Law - Topic 434

Offences against the administration of law and justice - Disobedience and obstruction - Obstruction and resistance of peace officer, in execution of his duty - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that the giving of a false identity to the police by a person involved in apparently suspicious conduct constituted the offence of wilfully obstructing a peace officer in the execution of his duty - The court based its finding on the assumption that the accused was not obliged to say anything to the police.

Police - Topic 2204

Duties - Common law duties - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that at common law the general duties of a police officer are to preserve the Queen's peace, especially as it relates to the protection of life and property, and to prevent crime - The court held that these common law duties have been recognized by statute, referring to s. 37(3) of the Saskatchewan Police Act and s. 18(a) of the federal Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act - See paragraph 13.

Police - Topic 3101

Powers - Investigation - General - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that the duty of police to investigate potential criminal activity included the duty to attempt to establish the identity of those involved and the duty to prevent a crime from being committed - See paragraph 12.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Moore, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 195; 24 N.R. 181, consd. [para. 7].

R. v. Hudson (1990), 83 Sask.R. 177, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Guthrie (1982), 39 A.R. 435; 69 C.C.C.(2d) 216 (C.A.), consd. [para. 8].

R. v. Huneault (1985), 17 C.C.C.(3d) 270, (Qué. C.A.), not appld. [para. 8].

R. v. Biron (1975), 4 N.R. 45; 30 C.R.N.S. 109 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Murphy (1981), 58 C.C.C.(2d) 56 (N.S.S.C.), not appld. [para. 10].

R. v. Tortolano et al. (1975), 28 C.C.C.(2d) 562 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 11].

Rice v. Connolly, [1966] 2 All E.R. 649 (Q.B.D.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Westlie (1971), 2 C.C.C.(2d) 315 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 11].

Knowlton v. The Queen (1973), 21 C.R.N.S. 344 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Goodman (1951), 99 C.C.C. 366 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Houle (1985), 24 C.C.C.(3d) 57 (Alta. C.A.), not appld. [para. 15].

R. v. Kephart and Oliver (1988), 91 A.R. 321; 44 C.C.C.(3d) 97 (C.A.), not appld. [para. 15].

R. v. Waterfield, [1963] 3 All E.R. 659 (Q.B.D.), not appld. [para. 15].

Hinchliffe v. Sheldon, [1955] 3 All E.R. 406, refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Bakin (1973), 14 C.C.C.(2d) 541, refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Lawson (1973), 22 C.R.N.S. 215 (Ont. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Johnson (1985), 41 Sask.R. 205 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Mellquist (1988), 68 Sask.R. 198; 42 C.C.C.(3d) 231 (C.A.), consd. [para. 25].

R. v. Lis (1983), 48 A.R. 57 (Prov. Ct.), disagreed with [para. 25].

Schell v. Truba et al. (1990), 89 Sask.R. 137, refd to. [para. 28].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 129(a) [paras. 1, 14, 25, 26]; sect. 495 [paras. 7, 10]; sect. 495(1)(a), sect. 495(1)(b), sect. 495(1)(c) [para. 9]; sect. 495(2)(d)(i) [paras. 8-9]; sect. 813, sect. 830 [para. 30].

Police Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. P-15, sect. 37(3)(a) [para. 13].

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. R-10, sect. 18(a) [para. 13].

Counsel:

K.S. Bartlett, for the Crown;

J.E. Lawrence, for the accused.

This appeal was heard before Baynton, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of North Battleford, whose decision was delivered on January 21, 1991.