R. v. Sadowsky (E.F.), (1993) 111 Sask.R. 102 (ProvCt)

• Judge: Deshaye, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: April 26, 1993
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1993), 111 Sask.R. 102 (ProvCt)

R. v. Sadowsky (E.F.) (1993), 111 Sask.R. 102 (ProvCt)

MLB headnote and full text

Her Majesty The Queen v. Eugene F. Sadowsky

Indexed As: R. v. Sadowsky (E.F.)

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Deshaye, P.C.J.

April 26, 1993.

Summary:

The accused was charged under the High­way Traffic Act with driving without rea­sonable consideration for other users of the highway. The accused did not appear at the trial, but was represented by counsel. The Crown argued that since a witness testified that he could have identified the accused if he had been in court, the identity of the accused as the driver of the vehicle was proved.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court rejected the argument and dismissed the charge.

Criminal Law - Topic 4487

Procedure - Trial - Attendance of accused - The accused was charged with driving without reasonable consideration for other users of the highway - The accused did not appear at the trial, but was represented by counsel - The Crown argued that since a witness testified that he could have identified the accused if he had been in court, the identity of the accused as the driver of the vehicle was proved - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court declined to order the accused to appear and dismissed the charge, where there was no evidence to connect the accused with the witness' description.

Criminal Law - Topic 4487

Procedure - Trial - Attendance of accused - Section 800(2) of the Criminal Code provided that "a defendant may appear personally or by counsel or agent, but the summary conviction court may require the defendant to appear personally ..." - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court stated that "a defendant has every right under the law to appear by counsel or agent ... the cir­cumstances would be exceptional where a trial judge would want to order a personal appearance by the defendant simply and for the sole purpose of assisting the Crown in proving identity ... this is particularly so where no indication was received that the Crown could not have established the facts otherwise." - See paragraph 9.

Criminal Law - Topic 5241

Evidence and witnesses - Eye witness identification - [See both Criminal Law - Topic 4487 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Duperon, [1965] 3 C.C.C. 344 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 800(2) [para. 3].

Counsel:

D.R. Cann, for the Crown;

H.G. Walker, Q.C., for the defence.

This case was heard at North Battleford, Saskatchewan, before Deshaye, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on April 26, 1993.