R. v. Simon (No. 3), (1982) 38 A.R. 393 (NWTSC)

• Judge: de Weerdt, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Northwest Territories (Canada)
• Case Date: July 15, 1982
• Jurisdiction: Northwest Territories
• Citations: (1982), 38 A.R. 393 (NWTSC)

R. v. Simon (1982), 38 A.R. 393 (NWTSC)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Simon (No. 3)

(SC 2564)

Indexed As: R. v. Simon (No. 3)

Northwest Territories Supreme Court

de Weerdt, J.

July 15, 1982

Summary:

The accused was declared a dangerous offender and sentenced for an indeterminate period of imprisonment under s. 688 of the Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34. The accused applied for a declaration that s. 688 was inoperative by virtue of ss. 9 and 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982). The Northwest Territories Supreme Court dismissed the application.

Civil Rights - Topic 3543

Detention and imprisonment - Arbitrary imprisonment - What constitutes - The accused was sentenced for an indeterminate period under s. 688 of the Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34 - The accused applied for a declaration that s. 688 was inoperative because of s. 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982), which stated that "Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily . . . imprisoned" - The Northwest Territories Supreme Court dismissed the application - The court held that the indeterminate imprisonment of the accused was a rational and principled determination of the court and not an arbitrary determination - See paragraphs 12 and 13.

Civil Rights - Topic 3826

Cruel and unusual punishment - What constitutes cruel and unusual punishment - Indeterminate detention - The accused was sentenced to an indeterminate period under s. 688 of the Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34 - The accused applied for a declaration that s. 688 was inoperative, because of s. 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982), which stated that "Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual ... punishment" - The Northwest Territories Supreme Court dismissed the application - The court held that an indeterminate period of detention was not cruel and unusual punishment - See paragraphs 12 and 13.

Cases Noticed:

Ex parte Matticks, [1973] S.C.R. 6; 15 C.C.C.(2d) 213, affirming 10 C.C.C.(2d) 438 (Que. C.A.), consd. [para. 7].

R. v. Hatchwell, [1974] 1 W.W.R. 307; 14 C.C.C.(2d) 556; revd. [1975] 4 W.W.R. 68; 3 N.R. 571; 21 C.C.C.(2d) 201 (S.C.C.), ref'd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Miller and Cockriell, [1977] 2 S.C.R. 680; 11 N.R. 386; 70 D.L.R.(3d) 324; [1976] 5 W.W.R. 50; 31 C.C.C.(2d) 177, affirming, [1975] 6 W.W.R. 1; 24 C.C.C.(2d) 401; 33 C.R.N.S. 129; 63 D.L.R.(3d) 193 (B.C.C.A.), ref'd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Shand (1976), 13 O.R.(2d) 65; 30 C.C.C.(2d) 23; 70 D.L.R.(3d) 395 (C.A.), ref'd to. [para. 12].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Bill of Rights, R.S.C. 1970, Appendix III, sect. 2 [para. 8].

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982), sect. 9, sect. 12 [para. 3].

Constitution Act (1982), sect. 52 [para. 4].

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 687 [para. 6]; sect. 688 [para. 5].

Counsel:

B. Fontaine, for the applicant;

E.J. Richard, and C. Meikle, for the respondent.

This application was heard before de WEERDT, J., of the Northwest Territories Supreme Court, who delivered the following judgment on July 15, 1982.