R. v. MacDonnell (F.E.), (1996) 148 N.S.R.(2d) 289 (CA)
Judge | Roscoe, Bateman and Flinn, JJ.A. |
Court | Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia (Canada) |
Case Date | February 14, 1996 |
Jurisdiction | Nova Scotia |
Citations | (1996), 148 N.S.R.(2d) 289 (CA) |
R. v. MacDonnell (F.E.) (1996), 148 N.S.R.(2d) 289 (CA);
429 A.P.R. 289
MLB headnote and full text
Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. Francis Ellen MacDonnell (respondent)
(C.A.C. No. 118082)
Indexed As: R. v. MacDonnell (F.E.)
Nova Scotia Court of Appeal
Roscoe, Bateman and Flinn, JJ.A.
February 14, 1996.
Summary:
The accused was charged in 1994 with a murder allegedly committed 31 years earlier. The death was investigated by Magisterial Inquest and ruled to be accidental. The accused applied under s. 24(1) of the Charter for a stay of proceedings, claiming that the delay denied her right to a fair trial.
The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, in a judgment reported 141 N.S.R.(2d) 266; 403 A.P.R. 266, allowed the application and granted a stay of proceedings. The Crown appealed.
The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and remitted the matter for trial.
Civil Rights - Topic 3157
Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal and quasi-criminal proceedings - Right to just and fair trial - The accused was charged in 1994 with a murder allegedly committed in 1962 - An Inquest ruled the death accidental - The trial judge granted a stay of proceedings under s. 24(1) of the Charter, where the accused would be denied a fair trial - A lengthy pre-charge delay did not, per se, deny an accused a fair trial - However, the doctor who operated on the victim and the pathologist who performed the autopsy were both deceased and transcripts of their Inquest evidence were unavailable - The two medical witnesses were critical to the accused's defence - Their unavailability jeopardized the accused's ability to secure a fair trial - The Crown intended to present new medical evidence based on the medical notes of the two doctors - The accused was denied the opportunity to rebut or challenge the new evidence - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal set aside the stay - The trial judge erred in finding the missing evidence critical to the accused - The court stated that the alleged prejudice was based on speculation and conjecture, which was insufficient to justify the drastic remedy of a stay.
Civil Rights - Topic 8374
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Stay of proceedings - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3157 ].
Cases Noticed:
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; 28 C.R.R. 122; 13 B.C.L.R.(2d) 1, refd to. [para. 23].
R. v. W.K.L., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 1091; 124 N.R. 146; [1991] 4 W.W.R. 385; 64 C.C.C.(3d) 321; 6 C.R.(4th) 1; 4 C.R.R.(2d) 298, refd to. [para. 25].
R. v. D.A. (1992), 57 O.A.C. 295; 76 C.C.C.(3d) 1 (C.A.), affd. [1993] 2 S.C.R. 441; 153 N.R. 233; 63 O.A.C. 98, refd to. [para. 27].
R. v. Johnson (1991), 104 N.S.R.(2d) 264; 283 A.P.R. 264 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 29].
R. v. W.G.G. (1990), 85 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 91; 266 A.P.R. 91; 58 C.C.C.(3d) 263 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 29].
Statutes Noticed:
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 24(1) [para. 2].
Counsel:
Robert C. Hagell, for the Crown;
Hector J. MacIsaac, for the accused.
This appeal was heard on January 19, 1996, before Roscoe, Bateman and Flinn, JJ.A., of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal.
On February 14, 1996, Flinn, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
R. v. Carosella (N.), (1997) 207 N.R. 321 (SCC)
...R. v. Halcrow (V.A.) (1993), 24 B.C.A.C. 197; 40 W.A.C. 197; 80 C.C.C.(3d) 320 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 77]. R. v. MacDonnell (F.E.) (1996), 148 N.S.R.(2d) 289; 429 A.P.R. 289 (C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. Daley (D.L.) (1992), 81 Man.R.(2d) 302; 30 W.A.C. 302; 77 C.C.C.(3d) 426 (C.A.), refd ......
-
R. v. Carosella (N.), (1997) 98 O.A.C. 81 (SCC)
...R. v. Halcrow (V.A.) (1993), 24 B.C.A.C. 197; 40 W.A.C. 197; 80 C.C.C.(3d) 320 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 77]. R. v. MacDonnell (F.E.) (1996), 148 N.S.R.(2d) 289; 429 A.P.R. 289 (C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. Daley (D.L.) (1992), 81 Man.R.(2d) 302; 30 W.A.C. 302; 77 C.C.C.(3d) 426 (C.A.), refd ......
-
R. v. Yogeswaran,
...warrants a stay of proceedings: La, at paras. 24-25; see e.g., R. v. MacDonnell (1995), 141 N.S.R. (2d) 266 (S.C.), reversed (1996), 148 N.S.R. (2d) 289 (C.A.), reversed [1997] 1 S.C.R. 305. [132] In two separate cases, the Court of Appeal for Ontario has recognized that the Crown’s duty to......
-
R. v. Shalala (R.), [1996] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) No. 139 (TD)
...152, refd to. [para. 7]. R. v. D.A. (1993), 57 O.A.C. 295; 76 C.C.C.(3d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9]. R. v. MacDonnell (F.E.) (1996), 148 N.S.R.(2d) 289 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9]. R. v. Colpitts (1965), 47 C.R. 175 (N.B.C.A.), refd to. [para. 9]. Counsel: Scott G. Ellsworth, Bruce Phillip......
-
R. v. Carosella (N.), (1997) 207 N.R. 321 (SCC)
...R. v. Halcrow (V.A.) (1993), 24 B.C.A.C. 197; 40 W.A.C. 197; 80 C.C.C.(3d) 320 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 77]. R. v. MacDonnell (F.E.) (1996), 148 N.S.R.(2d) 289; 429 A.P.R. 289 (C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. Daley (D.L.) (1992), 81 Man.R.(2d) 302; 30 W.A.C. 302; 77 C.C.C.(3d) 426 (C.A.), refd ......
-
R. v. Carosella (N.), (1997) 98 O.A.C. 81 (SCC)
...R. v. Halcrow (V.A.) (1993), 24 B.C.A.C. 197; 40 W.A.C. 197; 80 C.C.C.(3d) 320 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 77]. R. v. MacDonnell (F.E.) (1996), 148 N.S.R.(2d) 289; 429 A.P.R. 289 (C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. Daley (D.L.) (1992), 81 Man.R.(2d) 302; 30 W.A.C. 302; 77 C.C.C.(3d) 426 (C.A.), refd ......
-
R. v. Yogeswaran,
...warrants a stay of proceedings: La, at paras. 24-25; see e.g., R. v. MacDonnell (1995), 141 N.S.R. (2d) 266 (S.C.), reversed (1996), 148 N.S.R. (2d) 289 (C.A.), reversed [1997] 1 S.C.R. 305. [132] In two separate cases, the Court of Appeal for Ontario has recognized that the Crown’s duty to......
-
R. v. Shalala (R.), [1996] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) No. 139 (TD)
...152, refd to. [para. 7]. R. v. D.A. (1993), 57 O.A.C. 295; 76 C.C.C.(3d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9]. R. v. MacDonnell (F.E.) (1996), 148 N.S.R.(2d) 289 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9]. R. v. Colpitts (1965), 47 C.R. 175 (N.B.C.A.), refd to. [para. 9]. Counsel: Scott G. Ellsworth, Bruce Phillip......