R. v. Peterie (S.), (1996) 140 Sask.R. 11 (ProvCt)

• Judge: Rathgeber, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: February 05, 1996
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1996), 140 Sask.R. 11 (ProvCt)

R. v. Peterie (S.) (1996), 140 Sask.R. 11 (ProvCt)

MLB headnote and full text

Her Majesty the Queen v. Steve Peterie

Indexed As: R. v. Peterie (S.)

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Rathgeber, P.C.J.

February 5, 1996.

Summary:

The accused was charged with two counts of public nudity pursuant to s. 174(1)(b) of the Criminal Code.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court acquitted the accused.

Criminal Law - Topic 23

Prosecution of crime - Consent of Attor­ney General - Require­ment for - Peterie was charged with two counts of public nudity contrary to s. 174(1)(b) of the Criminal Code - At the end of the trial, Peterie submitted that the charges should be dis­missed because there was no proof that the Attorney General had consented to the prosecution - Crown counsel submitted that (1) the objection was late and should have been taken in more timely fashion and (2) he had instructed that the charges were to be laid and that he was authorized to do so as agent of the Attorney General - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court dismissed the charges.

Criminal Law - Topic 758

Disorderly conduct - Nudity - [See Criminal Law - Topic 23 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Harrison, [1977] 1 S.C.R. 238; 8 N.R. 47; [1976] 3 W.W.R. 536; 28 C.C.C.(2d) 279, consd. [para. 4].

R. v. Light (R.C.) and Hull (R.B.) (1993), 21 B.C.A.C. 241; 37 W.A.C. 241; 78 C.C.C.(3d) 221 (C.A.), dist. [para. 8].

R. v. Sunila and Soleyman (No. 6) (1987), 78 N.S.R.(2d) 24; 193 A.P.R. 24; 35 C.C.C.(3d) 289 (C.A.), consd. [para. 9].

R. v. Tapaquon, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 535; 159 N.R. 321; 116 Sask.R. 81; 59 W.A.C. 81, consd. [para. 10].

R. v. Niman (1974), 31 C.R.N.S. 51 (Ont. Prov. Ct.), consd. [para. 11].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 174(1)(b) [para. 1].

Counsel:

Mark Scrivens, for the Crown;

Peter Kolenick, for the accused.

This matter was heard before Rathgeber, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on February 5, 1996.