R. v. Wilder (D.M.), 2001 BCSC 1634
Judge | Romilly, J. |
Court | Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada) |
Case Date | November 27, 2001 |
Jurisdiction | British Columbia |
Citations | 2001 BCSC 1634;[2001] B.C.T.C. 1634 (SC) |
R. v. Wilder (D.M.), [2001] B.C.T.C. 1634 (SC)
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [2002] B.C.T.C. TBEd. SE.025
Her Majesty the Queen v. Dara M. Wilder
(CC901654; 2001 BCSC 1634)
Indexed As: R. v. Wilder (D.M.)
British Columbia Supreme Court
Vancouver
Romilly, J.
November 27, 2001.
Summary:
This headnote contains no summary.
Criminal Law - Topic 22
General principles - Prosecution of crime - Function of the Crown prosecutor, Director of Public Prosecutions and Attorney General - See paragraphs 1 to 26.
Criminal Law - Topic 26
General principles - Prosecution of crime - Prosecutorial discretion - See paragraphs 1 to 26.
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Wilder (D.M.) (2000), 132 B.C.A.C. 122; 215 W.A.C. 122; 142 C.C.C.(3d) 418 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 4].
R. v. White (J.K.), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 417; 240 N.R. 1; 123 B.C.A.C. 161; 201 W.A.C. 161; 135 C.C.C.(3d) 257, affing. (1998), 102 B.C.A.C. 28; 166 W.A.C. 28; 122 C.C.C.(3d) 167 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].
R. v. Charest (1990), 28 Q.A.C. 258; 57 C.C.C.(3d) 312 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].
R. v. Grover (1990), 38 O.A.C. 219; 56 C.C.C.(3d) 532 (C.A.), revd. [1991] 3 S.C.R. 387; 131 N.R. 80; 50 O.A.C. 185; 67 C.C.C.(3d) 576, refd to. [para. 10].
Boucher v. R. (1954), 110 C.C.C. 263 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 11].
R. v. Beare; R. v. Higgins, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 387; 88 N.R. 205; 71 Sask.R. 1; 45 C.C.C.(3d) 57; [1989] 1 W.W.R. 97; 66 C.R.(3d) 97; 55 D.L.R.(4th) 481, refd to. [para. 13].
R. v. V.T., [1992] 1 S.C.R. 749; 134 N.R. 289; 7 B.C.A.C. 81; 15 W.A.C. 81; [1992] W.W.R. 193; 71 C.C.C.(3d) 32, refd to. [para. 14].
R. v. Franks (1991), 4 B.C.A.C. 72; 9 W.A.C. 72; 67 C.C.C.(3d) 280 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].
R. v. Petropoulos (W.) (1995), 54 B.C.A.C. 119; 88 W.A.C. 119 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 18].
Saikaly v. R. (1979), 48 C.C.C.(2d) 192 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].
R. v. Arviv (1985), 8 O.A.C. 92; 19 C.C.C.(3d) 395; 20 D.L.R.(4th) 422; 45 C.R.(3d) 354 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].
R. v. Ertel (1987), 20 O.A.C. 257; 35 C.C.C.(3d) 398; 58 C.R.(3d) 252; 30 C.R.R. 209 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].
R. v. Light (1993), 78 C.C.C.(3d) 221 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 21].
R. v. Smythe, [1971] 1 S.C.R. 680; 3 C.C.C.(2d) 366, refd to. [para. 21].
R. v. Verrette, [1978] 2 S.C.R. 838; 21 N.R. 571; 40 C.C.C.(2d) 273, refd to. [para. 21].
Balderstone v. R. et al. (1983), 23 Man.R.(2d) 125; 8 C.C.C.(3d) 532 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 21].
R. v. Power (E.), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 601; 165 N.R. 241; 117 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 269; 365 A.P.R. 269; 89 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 29 C.R.(4th) 1, refd to. [para. 22].
United States of America v. Leon, [1996] 1 S.C.R. 888; 195 N.R. 228; 90 O.A.C. 217, refd to. [para. 22].
R. v. Durette et al. (1992), 54 O.A.C. 81; 72 C.C.C.(3d) 421 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].
Kostuch v. Alberta (Attorney General) (1995), 174 A.R. 109; 102 W.A.C. 109; 43 C.R.(4th) 811 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 25].
Patrick et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) (1986), 28 C.C.C.(3d) 417 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 26].
Werring v. British Columbia (Attorney General) et al. (1997), 101 B.C.A.C. 199; 164 W.A.C. 199; 122 C.C.C.(3d) 343 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].
Counsel:
Lindsay Smith and Veda Kenya, for the Crown;
The accused, Dara M. Wilder in person.
This application was heard on October 22-26, 30 and 31 and November 1, 5, 6, 13, 14, 19 and 20, 2001, before Romilly, J., of the British Columbia Supreme Court, who delivered the following decision on November 27, 2001.
Please note: The following judgment has not been edited.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Table of cases
...430 R v Wijesinha, [1995] 3 SCR 422, 100 CCC (3d) 410, 1995 CanLII 67 .............499 R v Wilder, 2001 BCSC 1634 ..............................................................................580 R v Williams (1897), 28 OR 583, 3 CCC 9, [1897] OJ No 153 (Div Ct) ............546 R v Williams......
-
The Prosecutor
...of Law” (2010) 33 Dal LJ 1 at 43–44. 9 See R v Stobbe , 2011 MBQB 280 at para 47; R v Van Bibber , 2010 YKTC 49 at para 76; R v Wilder , 2001 BCSC 1634 at para 8; R v Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd , [2001] OJ No 1580 at para 18 (SCJ) [ Atomic Energy ]; R v Blencowe (1997), 118 CCC (3d) 529 at......
-
R. c. Oland,
...preuve pertinent dans une demande relative à un abus de procédure (R. c. Kocet, 2015 ONCJ 804, au par. 34; R. c. Wilder, 2001 BCSC 1634, au par. 8; et, dans le contexte d’une action au civil, Roy c. British Columbia (Attorney General), 2005 BCCA 88, au [41] &......
-
R v Oland, 2018 NBQB 253
...of process but may be some evidence relevant to an abuse of process application (R. v. Kocet, 2015 ONCJ 804 at para. 34; R. v. Wilder, 2001 BCSC 1634 at para. 8; and in the civil context Roy v. British Columbia (Attorney General), 2005 BCCA 88 at para. [41] The significance of the failure o......
-
R. c. Oland,
...preuve pertinent dans une demande relative à un abus de procédure (R. c. Kocet, 2015 ONCJ 804, au par. 34; R. c. Wilder, 2001 BCSC 1634, au par. 8; et, dans le contexte d’une action au civil, Roy c. British Columbia (Attorney General), 2005 BCCA 88, au [41] &......
-
R v Oland, 2018 NBQB 253
...of process but may be some evidence relevant to an abuse of process application (R. v. Kocet, 2015 ONCJ 804 at para. 34; R. v. Wilder, 2001 BCSC 1634 at para. 8; and in the civil context Roy v. British Columbia (Attorney General), 2005 BCCA 88 at para. [41] The significance of the failure o......
-
The Prosecutor
...of Law” (2010) 33 Dal LJ 1 at 43–44. 9 See R v Stobbe , 2011 MBQB 280 at para 47; R v Van Bibber , 2010 YKTC 49 at para 76; R v Wilder , 2001 BCSC 1634 at para 8; R v Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd , [2001] OJ No 1580 at para 18 (SCJ) [ Atomic Energy ]; R v Blencowe (1997), 118 CCC (3d) 529 at......
-
Table of cases
...430 R v Wijesinha, [1995] 3 SCR 422, 100 CCC (3d) 410, 1995 CanLII 67 .............499 R v Wilder, 2001 BCSC 1634 ..............................................................................580 R v Williams (1897), 28 OR 583, 3 CCC 9, [1897] OJ No 153 (Div Ct) ............546 R v Williams......