R. v. Sample (D.), 2002 ABQB 57

• Judge: Rooke, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: December 17, 2001
• Citations: 2002 ABQB 57;(2002), 315 A.R. 261 (QB)

R. v. Sample (D.) (2002), 315 A.R. 261 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2002] A.R. TBEd. JA.148

Her Majesty The Queen (respondent) v. Dianna Sample (applicant)

(Action No. 005084132Q1; 2002 ABQB 57)

Indexed As: R. v. Sample (D.)

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Rooke, J.

January 22, 2002.

Summary:

Sample was charged with theft from her employer. She applied for a stay of proceedings, alleging that she was prejudiced by an unreasonable pre-charge delay.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application.

Civil Rights - Topic 3130

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal and quasi-criminal proceedings - Delay (Charter, s. 7) - Sample was dismissed from her employment as a bookkeeper for a contracting company amidst accusations of theft - A complaint was filed with the police in October 1996 - She was charged with theft in January 2000 - She applied for a stay of proceedings, alleging abuse of process and Charter breaches relating to the pre-charge delay - The delay was due to the overburdening of the Economic Crime Unit, not the complexity of the case - Sample argued that the delay had resulted in prejudice to her - She was off work with depression and acute anxiety disorder, due to the stress surrounding the theft allegations - She claimed certain documentary evidence was now inaccessible - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application - The Court held that while the experience was undoubtedly personally traumatic, Sample had "failed to discharge her onus to establish a foundation for an abuse of process, and/or a Charter breach, upon which to grant a judicial stay" - See paragraphs 20 to 35.

Civil Rights - Topic 3157.4

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal and quasi-criminal proceedings - Abuse of process - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3130 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8374

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Stay of proceedings - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3130 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Askov, Hussey, Melo and Gugliotta, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1199; 113 N.R. 241; 42 O.A.C. 81; 59 C.C.C.(3d) 449, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Young (1984), 3 O.A.C. 254; 13 C.C.C.(3d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 2, footnote 3].

R. v. Carter (1986), 67 N.R. 375; 26 C.C.C.(3d) 572 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 2, footnote 3].

R. v. Mills, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 863; 67 N.R. 241; 16 O.A.C. 81; 26 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 2, footnote 3].

R. v. MacMillan (1991), 49 O.A.C. 306; 3 O.R.(3d) 588 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 2, footnote 3].

R. v. M.L.M. (1994), 160 A.R. 383 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 2, footnote 3].

R. v. Conway, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1659; 96 N.R. 241; 34 O.A.C. 165; 49 C.C.C.(3d) 289; 70 C.R.(3d) 209, refd to. [para. 2, footnote 3].

R. v. Potvin (R.), [1993] 2 S.C.R. 880; 155 N.R. 241; 66 O.A.C. 81; 83 C.C.C.(3d) 97, refd to. [para. 2, footnote 3].

R. v. Morin, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771; 134 N.R. 321; 53 O.A.C. 241; 71 C.C.C.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 2, footnote 5].

R. v. Sapara (J.) (2001), 277 A.R. 357; 242 W.A.C. 357 (C.A.), leave to appeal dismissed (2001), 275 N.R. 197 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 2, footnote 5].

R. v. Merchant (D.M.) (1992), 127 A.R. 226; 20 W.A.C. 226 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Andrew, [1992] O.J. No. 2763 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Juhal, [2001] A.J. No. 632 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Mills, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 863; 67 N.R. 241; 16 O.A.C. 81; 52 C.R.(3d) 1; 29 D.L.R.(4th) 161; 26 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. W.K.L., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 1091; 124 N.R. 146; [1991] 4 W.W.R. 385; 64 C.C.C.(3d) 321, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Rourke, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 1021; 35 C.C.C.(2d) 129; 76 D.L.R.(3d) 193, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Cameron and Sayers (1985), 64 A.R. 161 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Antinello (J.J.) (1995), 165 A.R. 122; 89 W.A.C. 122; 39 C.R.(4th) 99 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Jewitt, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 128; 61 N.R. 159; [1985] 6 W.W.R. 127; 20 D.L.R.(4th) 651; 47 C.R.(3d) 193; 21 C.C.C.(3d) 7, refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Grimes (D.W.) (1998), 209 A.R. 360; 160 W.A.C. 360; 122 C.C.C.(3d) 331 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Hyde (D.M.) (1994), 127 Sask.R. 1 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 21].

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; 103 C.C.C.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. L.J.S. (1996), 179 A.R. 231 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 39].

R. v. Grandjambe (W.T.) (1996), 188 A.R. 163 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 39].

R. v. Beckei (J.) (1995), 165 A.R. 1; 89 W.A.C. 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 41].

R. v. Hedayat (A.G.) (1992), 133 A.R. 303 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 42].

R. v. Bremner and Bremner Engineering and Construction Ltd. (1991), 119 A.R. 81 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 42].

Counsel:

William G. Pinkney (Alberta Justice), for the Crown;

James W. Pittaway (Pittaway Haak), and Paul L. Moreau (Witten LLP), for the defence [see footnote 1].

This application was heard on December 17, 2001, by Rooke, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following decision on January 22, 2002.