R. v. Panousis (C.), (2002) 324 A.R. 165 (QB)

JudgeLee, J.
CourtCourt of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
Case DateNovember 18, 2002
Citations(2002), 324 A.R. 165 (QB);2002 ABQB 1012

R. v. Panousis (C.) (2002), 324 A.R. 165 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2002] A.R. TBEd. DE.014

Her Majesty The Queen v. Constantine Panousis (applicant)

(Action No. 06442925Q1; 2002 ABQB 1012)

Indexed As: R. v. Panousis (C.)

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Lee, J.

November 19, 2002.

Summary:

The accused was charged with two counts of trafficking in cocaine. The accused applied for a stay of proceedings, arguing that a 42 month delay from the time the first information was sworn until trial, violated his right to be tried within a reasonable time within the meaning of s. 11(b) of the Charter.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the accused's application.

Civil Rights - Topic 3265

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - What constitutes "within a reasonable time" - The accused was charged with two counts of trafficking in cocaine - The accused applied for a stay of proceedings, arguing that a 42 month delay from charge to trial violated his right to be tried within a reasonable time within the meaning of s. 11(b) of the Charter - The accused alleged that his trial was delayed because of the refusal by the Crown to sever the charges against him from those against a co-accused - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench stated that while this case was a very close and difficult judicial call, the court was not persuaded that the accused established a breach of s. 11(b) of the Charter - The court attributed an eight month delay to the Crown and noted that the institutional delay was largely caused by the actions of the co-accused - The court was unable to conclude however that the Crown should have severed - The court stated that had it been able to make that finding, the outcome might well have been different.

Cases Noticed:

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

R. v. Sapara (J.), [2001] 6 W.W.R. 459; 277 A.R. 357; 242 W.A.C. 357; 41 C.R.(5th) 356; 91 Alta. L.R.(3d) 28; 81 C.R.R.(2d) 356 (C.A.), leave to appeal dismissed (2001), 275 N.R. 187; 293 A.R. 291; 257 W.A.C. 291 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Tam (K.C.) et al., [2002] B.C.T.C. 583 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 46].

R. v. Koruz et al. (1992), 125 A.R. 161; 14 W.A.C. 161; 72 C.C.C.(3d) 353 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 47].

R. v. Cohen (J.) (1995), 68 Q.A.C. 241 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Thompson (S.G.) (1998), 170 N.S.R.(2d) 356; 515 A.P.R. 356 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Poitras, Shaw and Long (1976), 32 C.C.C.(2d) 184 (Man. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 101].

R. v. Mills, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 863; 67 N.R. 241; 16 O.A.C. 81; 26 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 106].

R. v. Rahey, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 588; 75 N.R. 81; 78 N.S.R.(2d) 183; 193 A.P.R. 183; 33 C.C.C.(3d) 289, refd to. [para. 107].

R. v. Song (D.) (2001), 296 A.R. 132 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 108].

R. v. Litchfield, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 333; 161 N.R. 161; 145 A.R. 321; 55 W.A.C. 321, refd to. [para. 112].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 11(b) [para. 2].

Counsel:

Sid M. Tarrabain, Q.C. (Tarrabain O'Byrne & Company), for the applicant;

Carrie J. Sharpe (Department of Justice (Federal)), for the Crown.

This application was heard on November 18, 2002, before Lee, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following judgment on November 19, 2002.

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • R. v. Chan (A.H.) et al., 2003 ABQB 759
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • September 8, 2003
    ...250]. R. v. Doucet (1992), 123 N.B.R.(2d) 344; 310 A.P.R. 344; 70 C.C.C.(3d) 385 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 251]. R. v. Panousis (C.) (2002), 324 A.R. 165; 2002 ABQB 1012, refd to. [para. 262]. R. v. Pangman (W.G.) et al. (2000), 149 Man.R.(2d) 68 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 264]. R. v. Stinchcomb......
  • R. v. Panousis (C.), 2002 ABQB 1109
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • December 17, 2002
    ...tried within a reasonable time within the meaning of s. 11(b) of the Charter. The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported 324 A.R. 165, dismissed the accused's application. The trial proceeded and the accused was found guilty. Just prior to the commencement of court proceedin......
  • R. v. Peterson (L.A.), [2013] A.R. Uned. 537 (PC)
    • Canada
    • Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
    • July 10, 2013
    ...its position, the Crown has relied on the four cases cited above and on R. v. Meisner, [2004] O.J. No. 3812 (Ont. C.A.), R. v. Panousis, 2002 ABQB 1012, and R. v. Tovey, 2006 ONCJ 492. Law and Analysis Generally [28] In R. v. Morin , supra, Justice Sopinka (at paras. 21-25) set out the prin......
  • R. v. Panousis (C.), 2002 ABQB 1120
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • December 17, 2002
    ...tried within a reasonable time within the meaning of s. 11(b) of the Charter. The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported 324 A.R. 165, dismissed the accused's application. The trial proceeded and the accused was found guilty. Just prior to the commencement of court proceedin......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • R. v. Chan (A.H.) et al., 2003 ABQB 759
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • September 8, 2003
    ...250]. R. v. Doucet (1992), 123 N.B.R.(2d) 344; 310 A.P.R. 344; 70 C.C.C.(3d) 385 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 251]. R. v. Panousis (C.) (2002), 324 A.R. 165; 2002 ABQB 1012, refd to. [para. 262]. R. v. Pangman (W.G.) et al. (2000), 149 Man.R.(2d) 68 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 264]. R. v. Stinchcomb......
  • R. v. Panousis (C.), 2002 ABQB 1109
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • December 17, 2002
    ...tried within a reasonable time within the meaning of s. 11(b) of the Charter. The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported 324 A.R. 165, dismissed the accused's application. The trial proceeded and the accused was found guilty. Just prior to the commencement of court proceedin......
  • R. v. Peterson (L.A.), [2013] A.R. Uned. 537 (PC)
    • Canada
    • Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
    • July 10, 2013
    ...its position, the Crown has relied on the four cases cited above and on R. v. Meisner, [2004] O.J. No. 3812 (Ont. C.A.), R. v. Panousis, 2002 ABQB 1012, and R. v. Tovey, 2006 ONCJ 492. Law and Analysis Generally [28] In R. v. Morin , supra, Justice Sopinka (at paras. 21-25) set out the prin......
  • R. v. Panousis (C.), 2002 ABQB 1120
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • December 17, 2002
    ...tried within a reasonable time within the meaning of s. 11(b) of the Charter. The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported 324 A.R. 165, dismissed the accused's application. The trial proceeded and the accused was found guilty. Just prior to the commencement of court proceedin......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT