R. v. Porisky (R.A.) et al.,

JurisdictionBritish Columbia
CourtCourt of Appeal (British Columbia)
Citation2012 BCCA 371,[2012] B.C.A.C. Uned. 61 (CA),[2012] B.C.A.C. Uned. 61
Date19 September 2012

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
6 practice notes
  • Review of Judicial Interim Release Orders
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Anatomy of Criminal Procedure. A Visual Guide to the Law Preliminary matters Judicial Interim Release
    • June 15, 2019
    ...that of the judge” who decided bail: R v K(RW) , 2013 BCCA 387 at para 4. See also R v Bath , 2013 BCCA 332 at paras 8–9; R v Porisky , 2012 BCCA 371 at para 7; R v Wilder , 2007 BCCA 446 at para 4. Between the higher and lower ends of the spectrum, some courts — especially in the Prairie p......
  • R. v. Gingras (J.G.),
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • October 22, 2012
    ...per Chiasson J.A. in Chambers. The Chief Justice directed a review of these decisions under s. 680 of the Criminal Code : R. v. Porisky , 2012 BCCA 371. [2] The appellants ask the Court to reconsider how we treat the strength of the grounds of appeal in deciding bail applications and to ord......
  • R. v. R.W.K., 2013 BCCA 387
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • August 12, 2013
    ...- General principles - Detention - Review - See paragraphs 1 to 11. Cases Noticed: R. v. Porisky (R.A.) et al., [2012] B.C.A.C. Uned. 61, 2012 BCCA 371, refd to. [para. R. v. Gill (P.S.), [2001] B.C.A.C. Uned. 129; 2001 BCCA 569, refd to. [para. 4]. R. v. Wilder (D.M.), [2007] B.C.A.C. Uned......
  • R. v. Bath (S.S.),
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • July 19, 2013
    ...trial or appeal - Release pending appeal - See paragraphs 1 to 13. Cases Noticed: R. v. Porisky (R.A.) et al., [2012] B.C.A.C. Uned. 61; 2012 BCCA 371, refd to. [para. R. v. Gill (P.S.), [2001] B.C.A.C. Uned. 129; 2001 BCCA 569, refd to. [para. 8]. R. v. Wilder (D.M.), [2007] B.C.A.C. Uned.......
  • Get Started for Free
5 cases
  • R. v. Gingras (J.G.),
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • October 22, 2012
    ...per Chiasson J.A. in Chambers. The Chief Justice directed a review of these decisions under s. 680 of the Criminal Code : R. v. Porisky , 2012 BCCA 371. [2] The appellants ask the Court to reconsider how we treat the strength of the grounds of appeal in deciding bail applications and to ord......
  • R. v. R.W.K., 2013 BCCA 387
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • August 12, 2013
    ...- General principles - Detention - Review - See paragraphs 1 to 11. Cases Noticed: R. v. Porisky (R.A.) et al., [2012] B.C.A.C. Uned. 61, 2012 BCCA 371, refd to. [para. R. v. Gill (P.S.), [2001] B.C.A.C. Uned. 129; 2001 BCCA 569, refd to. [para. 4]. R. v. Wilder (D.M.), [2007] B.C.A.C. Uned......
  • R. v. Bath (S.S.),
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • July 19, 2013
    ...trial or appeal - Release pending appeal - See paragraphs 1 to 13. Cases Noticed: R. v. Porisky (R.A.) et al., [2012] B.C.A.C. Uned. 61; 2012 BCCA 371, refd to. [para. R. v. Gill (P.S.), [2001] B.C.A.C. Uned. 129; 2001 BCCA 569, refd to. [para. 8]. R. v. Wilder (D.M.), [2007] B.C.A.C. Uned.......
  • R. v. Van Dyke (B.J.),
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • December 20, 2012
    ...one last time, if permitted. [8] The threshold for a direction under s. 680 is low: R. v. Gill , 2001 BCCA 569, para 4; R. v. Porisky , 2012 BCCA 371 at para. 7. The test is "whether the court, properly applying the law, could possibly conclude that the application for release should h......
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • Review of Judicial Interim Release Orders
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Anatomy of Criminal Procedure. A Visual Guide to the Law Preliminary matters Judicial Interim Release
    • June 15, 2019
    ...that of the judge” who decided bail: R v K(RW) , 2013 BCCA 387 at para 4. See also R v Bath , 2013 BCCA 332 at paras 8–9; R v Porisky , 2012 BCCA 371 at para 7; R v Wilder , 2007 BCCA 446 at para 4. Between the higher and lower ends of the spectrum, some courts — especially in the Prairie p......