R. v. S.T.N., (2006) 204 Man.R.(2d) 212 (QB)

• Judge: Suche, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: June 23, 2006
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (2006), 204 Man.R.(2d) 212 (QB);2006 MBQB 148

R. v. S.T.N. (2006), 204 Man.R.(2d) 212 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2006] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. JL.023

Her Majesty The Queen (respondent) v. S.T.N. (accused/applicant)

(CR 03-01-24273; 2006 MBQB 148)

Indexed As: R. v. S.T.N.

Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

Winnipeg Centre

Suche, J.

June 23, 2006.

Summary:

In December 2001, the accused was charged with sexual assault. The matter came to trial in December 2005. The accused moved for a stay of proceedings on the basis that his right to a speedy trial under s. 11(b) of the Charter had been breached.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the motion.

Editor's note: certain names in the following case have been initialized or the case otherwise edited to prevent the disclosure of identities where required by law, publication ban, Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.

Civil Rights - Topic 3265

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - What constitutes "within a reasonable time" - In December 2001, the accused was charged with sexual assault - The matter came to trial in December 2005 - The accused moved for a stay of proceedings on the basis that his right to a speedy trial under s. 11(b) of the Charter had been breached - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the motion - While 48 months was lengthy, in the circumstances, it was not unreasonable - The bulk of the delay was inherent to the charges or due to the actions of the accused, including a series of adjournments and his missed court appearances - Moreover, the accused had not established any prejudice to his liberty interests.

Civil Rights - Topic 3270

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - Evidence of prejudice and causes of delay - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3265 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Askov, Hussey, Melo and Gugliotta (1990), 113 N.R. 241; 42 O.A.C. 81 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Morin (1992), 134 N.R. 321; 53 O.A.C. 241 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. MacDougall (P.A.) (1998), 231 N.R. 147; 168 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 83; 517 A.P.R. 83 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Conway (1989), 96 N.R. 241; 34 O.A.C. 165; 49 C.C.C.(3d) 289 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Allen (H.D.) (1996), 92 O.A.C. 345; 110 C.C.C.(3d) 331 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Barkman (T.K.) (2004), 190 Man.R.(2d) 75; 335 W.A.C. 75; 2004 MBCA 151, refd to. [para. 32].

R. v. W.B. (2000), 133 O.A.C. 3; 145 C.C.C.(3d) 498 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Mills, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 863; 67 N.R. 241; 16 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 57].

R. v. Loewen (J.K.) (1998), 131 Man.R.(2d) 217; 187 W.A.C. 217 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 59].

R. v. Rahey (1987), 75 N.R. 81; 78 N.S.R.(2d) 183; 193 A.P.R. 183 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 64].

R. v. Sander (S.) (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 115; 96 W.A.C. 115; 98 C.C.C.(3d) 564 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 71].

R. v. Qureshi (F.) et al. (2004), 192 O.A.C. 50; 190 C.C.C.(3d) 453 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 71].

R. v. Satkunananthan (S.) et al. (2001), 143 O.A.C. 1; 152 C.C.C.(3d) 321 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 71].

R. v. MacPherson (J.M.) (1999), 127 B.C.A.C. 49; 207 W.A.C. 49; 1999 BCCA 403, refd to. [para. 71].

R. v. O'Connor (H.P.), [1995] 4 S.C.R. 411; 191 N.R. 1; 68 B.C.A.C. 1; 112 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 74].

Counsel:

Dale Schille, for the Crown;

Mark Wasyliw, for the applicant.

This motion was heard by Suche, J., of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Winnipeg Centre, who delivered the following judgment on June 23, 2006.