R. v. M.L.K., 2004 ABQB 734

• Judge: Watson, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: October 12, 2004
• Citations: 2004 ABQB 734;(2004), 370 A.R. 117 (QB)

R. v. M.L.K. (2004), 370 A.R. 117 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2004] A.R. TBEd. OC.096

Her Majesty The Queen v. M.L.K.

(9907-88795-Q1; 2004 ABQB 734)

Indexed As: R. v. M.L.K.

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Watson, J.

October 12, 2004.

Summary:

The accused was charged with assault and unsafe storage of firearms. At the Pre-Trial Conference, the trial judge gave directions as to how the case would proceed. The accused applied to rescind the directions, seeking that all of his Charter claims and motions be heard at trial before the jury rather than by the trial judge without the jury's intervention.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application and re-affirmed the directions.

Editor's note: certain names in the following case have been initialized or the case otherwise edited to prevent the disclosure of identities where required by law, publication ban, Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.

Civil Rights - Topic 8585

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Practice - Time for deciding Charter issues - At a pre-trial conference under s. 625.1(2) of the Criminal Code, the court directed that the accused's Charter applications and motions be heard by the trial judge prior to selecting a jury - The unrepresented accused applied to have the direction rescinded, wanting the Charter issues dealt with at the trial by the jury - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application - The jury's role was a fact-finder - The jury did not decide the admissibility of evidence or Charter challenges - The role of a pre-trial conference judge under s. 625.1(2) was to take the reasonable and necessary steps to ensure that a fair, efficient, lawful and coherent trial by jury occurred - It was a proper exercise of that power to direct that Charter issues be determined by the trial judge before the jury was selected.

Criminal Law - Topic 4471.1

Procedure - Pretrial hearings - Directions - [See Civil Rights - Topic 8585 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Askov, Hussey, Melo and Gugliotta, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1199; 113 N.R. 241; 42 O.A.C. 81; 59 C.C.C.(3d) 449; 79 C.R.(3d) 273; 49 C.R.R. 1; 74 D.L.R.(4th) 355; 75 O.R.(2d) 673; 1990 CarswellOnt 111, refd to. [para. 11, footnote 2].

R. v. Dwernychuk (M.K.) (1992), 135 A.R. 31; 33 W.A.C. 31; 77 C.C.C.(3d) 385; 42 M.V.R.(2d) 237; 12 C.R.R.(2d) 175; 1992 CarswellAlta 263 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused, [1993] 2 S.C.R. vii; 151 N.R. 400; 141 A.R. 317; 46 W.A.C. 317; 79 C.C.C.(3d) vi; 14 C.R.R.(2d) 192, refd to. [para. 28, footnote 3].

R. v. Romanowicz (J.) (1999), 124 O.A.C. 100; 138 C.C.C.(3d) 225; 26 C.R.(5th) 246; 45 M.V.R.(3d) 294; 178 D.L.R.(4th) 466; 45 O.R.(3d) 505 (Eng.); 45 O.R.(3d) 532 (Fr.); 1999 CarswellOnt 2671 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 40, footnote 4].

R. v. Sharpe (J.R.), [2001] 1 S.C.R. 45; 264 N.R. 201; 146 B.C.A.C. 161; 239 W.A.C. 161; 150 C.C.C.(3d) 321; 39 C.R.(5th) 72; 194 D.L.R.(4th) 1; 88 B.C.L.R.(3d) 1; 86 C.R.R.(2d) 1; [2001] 6 W.W.R. 1; 2001 CarswellBC 82; 2001 SCC 2, refd to. [para. 40, footnote 5].

Bell ExpressVu Limited Partnership v. Rex et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 559; 287 N.R. 248; 166 B.C.A.C. 1; 271 W.A.C. 1; 212 D.L.R.(4th) 1; 100 B.C.L.R.(3d) 1; 18 C.P.R.(4th) 289; 2002 CarswellBC 851; 2002 SCC 42, refd to. [para. 41, footnote 6].

R. v. Trang (D.) et al. (2001), 295 A.R. 250; 201 D.L.R.(4th) 160; 2001 CarswellAlta 729; 2001 ABQB 437, refd to. [para. 46, footnote 7].

R. v. Chaplin (D.A.) et al., [1995] 1 S.C.R. 727; 178 N.R. 118; 162 A.R. 272; 83 W.A.C. 272; 96 C.C.C.(3d) 225; 27 Alta. L.R.(3d) 1; 26 C.R.R.(2d) 189; 36 C.R.(4th) 201; 1995 CarswellAlta 408, refd to. [para. 49, footnote 8].

Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. New Brunswick (Attorney General), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 480; 203 N.R. 169; 182 N.B.R.(2d) 81; 463 A.P.R. 81; 110 C.C.C.(3d) 193; 2 C.R.(5th) 1; 139 D.L.R.(4th) 385; 39 C.R.R.(2d) 189; 1996 CarswellNB 463, refd to. [para. 49, footnote 9].

R. v. Bellefeuille (R.) (2003), 178 O.A.C. 338; 2003 CarswellOnt 4466 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 49, footnote 10].

R. v. Darrach (A.S.), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 443; 259 N.R. 336; 137 O.A.C. 91; 148 C.C.C.(3d) 97; 191 D.L.R.(4th) 539; 36 C.R.(5th) 223; 78 C.R.R.(2d) 53; 2000 CarswellOnt 3321; 2000 SCC 46, refd to. [para. 50, footnote 11].

R. v. Oickle (R.F.), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 3; 259 N.R. 227; 187 N.S.R.(2d) 201; 585 A.P.R. 201; 190 D.L.R.(4th) 257; 147 C.C.C.(3d) 321; 36 C.R.(5th) 129; 2000 CarswellNS 257; 2000 SCC 38, refd to. [para. 54, footnote 12].

R. v. Whittle (D.J.), [1994] 2 S.C.R. 914; 170 N.R. 16; 73 O.A.C. 201; 116 D.L.R.(4th) 416; 92 C.C.C.(3d) 11; 32 C.R.(4th) 1; 23 C.R.R.(2d) 6, refd to. [para. 54, footnote 13].

R. v. Bartle (K.), [1994] 3 S.C.R. 173; 172 N.R. 1; 74 O.A.C. 161; 92 C.C.C.(3d) 289; 33 C.R.(4th) 1; 6 M.V.R.(3rd) 1; 118 D.L.R.(4th) 83; 19 O.R.(3d) 802; 1994 CarswellOnt 100, refd to. [para. 54, footnote 14].

R. v. Prosper, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 236; 172 N.R. 161; 133 N.S.R.(2d) 321; 380 A.P.R. 321; 92 C.C.C.(3d) 353; 33 C.R.(4th) 85; 6 M.V.R.(3d) 181; 23 C.R.R.(2d) 239; 118 D.L.R.(4th) 154; 1994 CarswellNS 25, refd to. [para. 54, footnote 15].

R. v. Hebert, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 151; 110 N.R. 1; 77 C.R.(3d) 145; 57 C.C.C.(3d) 1; [1990] 5 W.W.R. 1; 47 B.C.L.R.(2d) 1; 49 C.R.R. 114, refd to. [para. 54, footnote 16].

R. v. Bohnet (R.) (2003), 339 A.R. 175; 312 W.A.C. 175; 2003 CarswellAlta 1270; 2003 ABCA 207, leave to appeal denied (2004), 328 N.R. 196; 363 A.R. 196; 343 W.A.C. 196 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 54, footnote 17].

R. v. White (J.K.), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 417; 240 N.R. 1; 123 B.C.A.C. 161; 201 W.A.C. 161; 135 C.C.C.(3d) 257; 24 C.R.(5th) 201; 42 M.V.R.(3d) 161; 174 D.L.R.(4th) 111; 63 C.R.R.(2d) 1; 1999 CarswellBC 1224; 7 B.H.R.C. 120, refd to. [para. 54, footnote 18].

R. v. Steel (R.K.) (1995), 174 A.R. 254; 102 W.A.C. 254; 34 Alta. L.R.(3d) 440; 1995 CarswellAlta 456, refd to. [para. 56, footnote 19].

R. v. Litchfield, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 333; 161 N.R. 161; 145 A.R. 321; 55 W.A.C. 321; 86 C.C.C.(3d) 97; 14 Alta.L.R.(3d) 1; 25 C.R.(4th) 137; 1993 CarswellAlta 160, refd to. [para. 57, footnote 20].

R. v. Trang (D.) et al. (2002), 331 A.R. 216; 17 Alta. L.R.(4th) 358; 2002 CarswellAlta 1555 (Q.B.), leave to appeal denied (2003), 320 N.R. 387; 363 A.R. 193; 343 W.A.C. 193; 2003 CarswellAlta 896 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 58, footnote 22].

R. v. Leduc (J.) (2003) 174 O.A.C. 242; 66 O.R.(3d) 1; 176 C.C.C.(3d) 321; 18 C.R.(6th) 167; 2003 CarswellOnt 2926 (C.A.), leave to appeal allowed (2003), 109 C.R.R.(2d) 187; 2003 CarswellOnt 4761 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 58, footnote 23].

R. v. Felderhof (J.B.) (2003), 180 O.A.C. 288; 180 C.C.C.(3d) 498; 17 C.R.(6th) 20; 235 D.L.R.(4th) 131; 2003 CarswellOnt 4943 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 59, footnote 24].

R. v. O'Connor (H.P.), [1995] 4 S.C.R. 411; 191 N.R. 1; 68 B.C.A.C. 1; 112 W.A.C. 1; [1996] 2 W.W.R. 153; 103 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 44 C.R.(4th) 1; 29 W.C.B.(2d) 152; 130 D.L.R.(4th) 235; 33 C.R.R.(2d) 1; 1995 CarswellBC 1098, refd to. [para. 61, footnote 25].

R. v. Elliott (J.Y.) (2003), 179 O.A.C. 219; 181 C.C.C.(3d) 118; 114 C.R.R.(2d) 1; 2003 CarswellOnt 4846 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 65, footnote 26].

R. v. Brouillard, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 39; 57 N.R. 168; 44 C.R.(3d) 124; 17 C.C.C.(3d) 193; 16 D.L.R.(4th) 447; [1985] R.D.J. 38, refd to. [para. 65, footnote 27].

R. v. Phillips (M.A.), [2003] 2 S.C.R. 623; 311 N.R. 94; 339 A.R. 50; 312 W.A.C. 50; 18 Alta. L.R.(4th) 1; 15 C.R.(6th) 51; [2004] 2 W.W.R. 585; 2003 CarswellAlta 1478; [2003] A.W.L.D. 449; 2003 SCC 57, refd to. [para. 67, footnote 29].

R. v. Tran (V.P.) (2001), 149 O.A.C. 120; 156 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 44 C.R.(5th) 12; 14 M.V.R.(4th) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 67, footnote 30].

R. v. Bertrand (1867), L.R. 1 P.C. 520 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 68, footnote 31].

R. v. Biscette (S.), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 599; 203 N.R. 244; 187 A.R. 392; 127 W.A.C. 392; 110 C.C.C.(3d) 285; 39 C.R.R.(2d) 187; 1996 CarswellAlta 1113, affing. (1995), 169 A.R. 81; 97 W.A.C. 81; 99 C.C.C.(3d) 326; 31 C.R.R.(2d) 38; 1995 CarswellAlta 1028 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 70, footnote 32].

Broda v. Broda (2001), 286 A.R. 120; 253 W.A.C. 120; 2001 CarswellAlta 865; 2001 ABCA 151 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 70, footnote 33].

R. v. Maynard; R. v. Dudley; R. v. Clarke (1979), 69 Cr. App. R. 309 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 71, footnote 34].

R. v. Morley, [1988] Q.B. 601; 87 Cr. App. R. 218; [1988] 2 All E.R. 396 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 71, footnote 35].

R. v. Fabrikant (V.) (1995), 67 Q.A.C. 268; 97 C.C.C.(3d) 544; 39 C.R.(4th) 1; 1995 CarswellQue 4 (C.A.), leave to appeal dismissed [1995] 3 S.C.R. vi; 193 N.R. 400; 42 C.R.(4th) 411; 98 C.C.C.(3d) vi, refd to. [para. 72, footnote 36].

R. v. Korponey, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 41; 44 N.R. 103; 26 C.R.(3d) 343; 132 D.L.R.(3d) 354; 65 C.C.C.(2d) 65; 1982 CarswellQue 7, refd to. [para. 73, footnote 38].

R. v. Brigham (T.B.) (1992), 52 Q.A.C. 241; 79 C.C.C.(3d) 365; 18 C.R.(4th) 309; 1992 CarswellQue 20 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 77, footnote 39].

R. v. Swain, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 933; 125 N.R. 1; 47 O.A.C. 81; 63 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 5 C.R.(4th) 253; 3 C.R.R.(2d) 1; 12 W.C.B.(2d) 582; 4 O.R.(3d) 383; 83 D.L.R.(4th) 193; 1991 CarswellOnt 109, refd to. [para. 77, footnote 40].

R. v. McClure (D.E.), [2001] 1 S.C.R. 445; 266 N.R. 275; 142 O.A.C. 201; 195 D.L.R.(4th) 513; 151 C.C.C.(3d) 321; 40 C.R.(5th) 19; 80 C.R.R.(2d) 217; 2001 CarswellOnt 496; 2001 SCC 14, refd to. [para. 78, footnote 41].

R. v. Collins, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 265; 74 N.R. 276; 56 C.R.(3d) 193; [1987] 3 W.W.R. 699; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 508; 33 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 13 B.C.L.R.(2d) 1; 28 C.R.R. 122; 1987 CarswellBC 94, refd to. [para. 79, footnote 42].

R. v. Morin, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771; 134 N.R. 321; 53 O.A.C. 241; 71 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 12 C.R.(4th) 1; 8 C.R.R.(2d) 193; 1992 CarswellOnt 75, refd to. [para. 80, footnote 43].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 625.1(1) [para. 42]; sect. 625.1(2) [para. 40]; sect. 645(5) [para. 43]; sect. 648(1) [para. 44].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Lea, H.C., A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages (1887), vol. 1, pp. 411 to 414 [para. 65, footnote 28].

Counsel:

Christian Lim, for the Crown;

M.L.K., on his own behalf.

This application was heard before Watson, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following judgment on October 12, 2004.