R. v. R.J.O., (1986) 69 A.R. 60 (ProvCt)

Judge:Fitch, P.C.J.
Court:Provincial Court (Alberta)
Case Date:March 27, 1986
Citations:(1986), 69 A.R. 60 (ProvCt)

R. v. R.J.O. (1986), 69 A.R. 60 (ProvCt)

MLB headnote and full text

Re R.J.O.

(No. Y18231)

Indexed As: R. v. R.J.O.

Alberta Provincial Court

Youth Division

Calgary, Alberta

Fitch, P.C.J.

March 27, 1986.


The Crown applied for an order that the proceedings against a young person charged with escaping lawful custody contrary to s. 133(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada be transferred to adult court.

The Alberta Provincial Court, Youth Division, reviewed the relevant factors and dismissed the application, because it was in the best interests of society that the young person be dealt with under the Young Offenders Act.

Criminal Law - Topic 8789

Young offenders - Transfer out of youth court - Considerations - The Crown applied to transfer a young offender charged with escaping lawful custody to adult court - The Alberta Provincial Court, Youth Division, in dismissing the application as being in the best interests of society, considered (1) the seriousness of the alleged offence and the circumstances of its commission; (2) the age, maturity, character, background and criminal record of the young person; (3) the comparative adequacies of the Young Offenders Act and the Criminal Code; (4) the availability of treatment or correctional resources; and (5) other factors including procedural differences, rights of the young offender, the effect of a conviction as an adult versus a young offender, etc. - The court noted that the Young Offenders Act provision for secure custody made transfers less necessary than under the Juvenile Delinquents Act.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. B. (1980), C.C.C.(3d) 185 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. K.J.H. (1980), 5 Man.R.(2d) 14; 54 C.C.C.(2d) 238 (Man. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 5].

Re Woodhouse and The Queen (1974), 16 C.C.C.(2d) 501 (Man. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. A.J.M. (1986), 68 A.R. 94, agreed with [para. 24].

Statutes Noticed:

Young Offenders Act, S.C. 1980-81-82, c. 110, sect. [para. 37]; sect. 16(2)(a) [para. 7]; sect. 16(2)(b) [para. 16]; sect. 16(2)(c) [para. 18]; sect. 16(2)(d) [para. 24]; sect. 16(2)(e) [para. 34]; sect. 16(2)(f) [para. 35]; sect. 19 [para. 38]; sect. 20(7) [para. 22]; sect. 28, sect. 29, sect. 30, sect. 31, sect. 32 [para. 39]; sect. 33 [para. 41]; sect. 36 [para. 42]; sect. 38 [para. 43]; sect. 40, sect. 41, sect. 42, sect. 43, sect. 44 [para. 44]; sect. 45 [para. 45]; sect. 56 [para. 46].


V. Russell, for the Crown;

G. Stobo, for R.J.O.

This application was heard at Calgary, Alberta, before Fitch, P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, Youth Division, who released the following judgment on March 27, 1986.

To continue reading