R. v. Lahonen (L.R.), (2015) 468 Sask.R. 20 (QB)
|Court:||Court of Queen's Bench for Saskatchewan|
|Case Date:||January 26, 2015|
|Citations:||(2015), 468 Sask.R. 20 (QB);2015 SKQB 25|
R. v. Lahonen (L.R.) (2015), 468 Sask.R. 20 (QB)
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite:  Sask.R. TBEd. FE.010
Leonard Ross Lahonen (appellant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent)
(CRIM No. 2155; 2015 SKQB 25)
Indexed As: R. v. Lahonen (L.R.)
Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench
Judicial Centre of Yorkton
January 26, 2015.
The accused's trial on several offences proceeded on an ex parte basis. The accused was convicted of assaulting a police officer engaged in the execution of his duty, impaired driving, and failure to appear. He was acquitted of operating an unregistered vehicle. The accused appealed the convictions on the basis that he had been unable to attend the trial due to circumstances beyond his control.
The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the appeal.
Criminal Law - Topic 127
General principles - Rights of accused - Right to be present at trial - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4487 ].
Criminal Law - Topic 4477
Procedure - Trial - Ex parte - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4487 ].
Criminal Law - Topic 4487
Procedure - Trial - Attendance of accused - In June 2010, the accused was charged with, inter alia, impaired driving - Trial dates were adjourned on five occasions at the accused's request - In October 2013, a sixth trial date was set for February 18, 2014 - The accused did not appear on February 18 - He called the police station and advised that he would require an adjournment because he did not have a ride to the courthouse - The trial proceeded on an ex parte basis - The accused was convicted of various offences - He appealed on the basis that he had been unable to attend the trial due to circumstances beyond his control - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the appeal - Society had an interest in having court proceedings conducted expeditiously - The court attempted to accommodate the accused over the course of 3.5 years - The accused did not fulfill his obligation to use his best efforts to attend necessary court appearances - The trial was conducted in a fair manner - The evidence tendered supported a conviction - There was no miscarriage of justice.
Criminal Law - Topic 7651
Summary conviction proceedings - Appeals - Grounds - General - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4487 ].
R. v. Helm (B.E.),  6 W.W.R. 641; 368 Sask.R. 115; 2011 SKQB 32, refd to. [para. 19].
R. v. Bolt (R.K.) (2014), 458 Sask.R. 185; 2014 SKQB 330, refd to. [para. 19].
R. v. Rogers,  6 W.W.R. 89; 34 Sask.R. 284 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].
R. v. Morgan (D.P.) (2002), 222 Sask.R. 306; 2002 SKQB 348, refd to. [para. 23].
R. v. Bloomfield (G.) (2011), 384 Sask.R. 18; 2011 SKQB 367, refd to. [para. 24].
R. v. Wolkins (R.D.) (2005), 229 N.S.R.(2d) 222; 725 A.P.R. 222; 192 C.C.C.(3d) 378; 2005 NSCA 2, refd to. [para. 32].
Leonard Lahonen, self-represented;
Barrie W. Stricker, for the Crown.
This appeal was heard before Megaw, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Yorkton, who delivered the following judgment on January 26, 2015.
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP