R. v. Reynolds (M.P.), 2016 NBQB 18

Judge:Morrison, J.
Court:Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick
Case Date:September 17, 2015
Jurisdiction:New Brunswick
Citations:2016 NBQB 18;(2016), 445 N.B.R.(2d) 36 (TD)
 
FREE EXCERPT

R. v. Reynolds (M.P.) (2016), 445 N.B.R.(2d) 36 (TD);

    445 R.N.-B.(2e) 36; 1166 A.P.R. 36

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2016] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. MR.006

Renvoi temp.: [2016] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. MR.006

Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Michael Paul Reynolds (respondent)

(F/CRA/7/2014; 2016 NBQB 18; 2016 NBBR 18)

Indexed As: R. v. Reynolds (M.P.)

Répertorié: R. v. Reynolds (M.P.)

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Trial Division

Judicial District of Fredericton

Morrison, J.

January 22, 2016.

Summary:

Résumé:

The accused, an aboriginal and member of the Woodstock First Nation, shot a moose within the territory of his aboriginal community and traded it to a non-aboriginal person in return for a motor vehicle. The non-aboriginal person was convicted of unlawful possession of the moose carcass (Fish and Wildlife Act, s. 58). The accused was charged as a party. The accused entered a plea of not guilty and applied to have the charges stayed on the basis that they violated his constitutionally recognized aboriginal treaty right to obtain necessaries through hunting and fishing by trading the products of those traditional activities.

The New Brunswick Provincial Court granted the stay. The Crown appealed.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, dismissed the appeal.

Civil Rights - Topic 7111

Federal, provincial or territorial legislation - Practice - Stay of proceedings - The accused, an aboriginal and member of the Woodstock First Nation, shot a moose within aboriginal territory and traded it to a non-aboriginal person for a motor vehicle - The non-aboriginal person was convicted of unlawful possession of the moose carcass (Fish and Wildlife Act, s. 58) - The accused was charged as a party - He sought a stay on the basis that the charges violated his constitutionally recognized aboriginal treaty right to obtain necessaries through hunting and fishing by trading products of those traditional activities - A provincial court judge granted the stay - The Crown appealed - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, dismissed the appeal - The trial judge properly concluded that a summary conviction prosecution in the Provincial Court was not the appropriate forum for determining the aboriginal treaty issues in this case and he was justified in granting the stay on that basis - See paragraphs 14 to 25.

Fish and Game - Topic 804

Indian, Inuit and Métis rights - General principles - Scope of rights - [See Civil Rights - Topic 7111 ].

Fish and Game - Topic 2431

Hunting offences - Possession of carcasses - [See Civil Rights - Topic 7111 ].

Trials - Topic 2027

Conduct of trial - Procedure - Stay of proceedings - [See Civil Rights - Topic 7111 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Marshall (D.J.), Jr., [1999] 3 S.C.R. 456; 246 N.R. 83; 178 N.S.R.(2d) 201; 549 A.P.R. 201; 177 D.L.R.(4th) 153, refd to. [para. 3].

R. v. Bernard (J.), (2003), 262 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 688 A.P.R. 1; 2003 NBCA 55, refd to. [para. 3].

R. v. Marshall (S.F.) et al.; R. v. Bernard (J.), [2005] 2 S.C.R. 220; 336 N.R. 22; 287 N.B.R.(2d) 206; 750 A.P.R. 206; 2005 SCC 43, refd to. [para. 3].

R. v. Regan (G.A.), [2002] 1 S.C.R. 297; 282 N.R. 1; 201 N.S.R.(2d) 63; 629 A.P.R. 63; 2002 SCC 12, refd to. [para. 13].

William v. British Columbia et al. (2014), 459 N.R. 287; 356 B.C.A.C. 1; 610 W.A.C. 1; 374 D.L.R.(4th) 1; 2014 SCC 44, refd to. [para. 15].

Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia - see William v. British Columbia et al.

Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests) et al., [2004] 3 S.C.R. 511; 327 N.R. 53; 206 B.C.A.C. 52; 338 W.A.C. 52; 2004 SCC 73, refd to. [para. 15].

Bedford et al. v. Canada (Attorney General), [2013] 3 S.C.R. 1101; 452 N.R. 1; 312 O.A.C. 53; 2013 SCC 72, refd to. [para. 25].

Counsel:

Avocats:

William B. Richards and Cory J.H. Roberts, for the appellant;

Maria Henheffer, Q.C., for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on September 17, 2015, before Morrison, J., of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, Judicial District of Fredericton, who delivered the following decision on January 22, 2016.

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP