R. v. Storozuk (S.T.), 2014 SKPC 206

• Judge: Harradence, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: November 27, 2014
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2014 SKPC 206;(2014), 461 Sask.R. 108 (PC)

R. v. Storozuk (S.T.) (2014), 461 Sask.R. 108 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2014] Sask.R. TBEd. DE.015

Her Majesty the Queen v. Stanley Trevor Storozuk

(Information No.: 24438624; 2014 SKPC 206)

Indexed As: R. v. Storozuk (S.T.)

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Harradence, P.C.J.

November 27, 2014.

Summary:

The accused was charged with impaired driving offences. He applied for a stay of proceedings under s. 24(1) of the Charter on the grounds that his s. 11(b) Charter right to be tried within a reasonable time was violated.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court granted the application.

Civil Rights - Topic 3265

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - What constitutes "within a reasonable time" - An Information charging Storozuk with impaired driving offences was sworn in January 2013 - The Information was mistakenly filed at the police detachment instead of being provided to the court - As a result, when Storozuk attended court two weeks later, as he had promised to do, his name was not called - Storozuk did not make any inquiries of the court or the police - Police discovered the error in October 2013 - A summons was drafted and served on Storozuk in December 2013 - Storozuk appeared in court as required in January 2014 - A trial was scheduled for April 2014, but was adjourned to June 2014 at the Crown's request due to witness unavailability - The court did not have enough time to accommodate the trial in June 2014, so it did not proceed until September 2014 - Storozuk applied for a stay of proceedings under s. 24(1) of the Charter, arguing that his s. 11(b) Charter right to be tried within a reasonable time was violated - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court granted the application - The delay, which was more than 12 months longer than necessary for a straightforward case of this nature, was overwhelmingly caused by the Crown - Storozuk's failure to make inquiries of the court or the police was not evidence of a lack of prejudice - He did everything that was legally required of him.

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 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8374

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Stay of proceedings - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3265 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Wilson (S.R.G.), [2014] 2 W.W.R. 26; 427 Sask.R. 63; 591 W.A.C. 63; 2013 CarswellSask 820; 110 W.C.B.(2d) 838; 2013 SKCA 128, refd to. [para. 4, footnote 1].

R. v. Godin (M.) (2009), 389 N.R. 1; 252 O.A.C. 377; 309 D.L.R.(4th) 149; 245 C.C.C.(3d) 271; 67 C.R.(6th) 95; 192 C.R.R.(2d) 184; 2009 SCC 26, refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Morin, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771; 134 N.R. 321; 53 O.A.C. 241; 71 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 12 C.R.(4th) 1; 8 C.R.R.(2d) 193; 1992 CanLII 89; 1992 CarswellOnt 75; 15 W.C.B.(2d) 276, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Pidskalny (W.P.), [2013] 8 W.W.R. 1; 417 Sask.R. 124; 580 W.A.C. 124; 299 C.C.C.(3d) 396; 2013 SKCA 74, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Askov, Hussey, Melo and Gugliotta, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1199; 113 N.R. 241; 42 O.A.C. 81; 1990 CanLII 45; 75 O.R.(2d) 673; 74 D.L.R.(4th) 355; 59 C.C.C.(3d) 449; 79 C.R.(3d) 273; 1990 CarswellOnt 111; 11 W.C.B.(2d) 224; 49 C.R.R. 1, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Pankiw (J.K.) (2013), 431 Sask.R. 108; 2013 CarswellSask 752; 110 W.C.B.(2d) 703; 55 M.V.R.(6th) 238; 2013 SKPC 173, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. K.G.W. (2014), 324 O.A.C. 231; 2014 ONCA 598, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Shepherd (S.J.) (2014), 440 Sask.R. 240; 2014 SKQB 83, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Steele (X.) (2012), 291 O.A.C. 336; 288 C.C.C.(3d) 255; 2012 ONCA 383, refd to. [para. 20].

Counsel:

John Morrall, for the Crown;

Stanley Storozuk, for the accused.

This voir dire and trial were heard at Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, before Harradence, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on November 27, 2014.