R. v. Woodman (P.), (1994) 129 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 346 (NFTD)

JudgeRoberts, J.
CourtSupreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada)
Case DateDecember 14, 1994
JurisdictionNewfoundland and Labrador
Citations(1994), 129 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 346 (NFTD)

R. v. Woodman (P.) (1994), 129 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 346 (NFTD);

    402 A.P.R. 346

MLB headnote and full text

Peter Woodman (applicant) v. Her Majesty The Queen (respondent)

(1994 No. C.B. 992)

Indexed As: R. v. Woodman (P.)

Newfoundland Supreme Court

Trial Division

Roberts, J.

December 14, 1994.

Summary:

The accused applied under s. 520 of the Criminal Code to review the decision of a Provincial Court judge denying him an interim release pending his trial.

The Newfoundland Supreme Court, Trial Division, allowed the application. The court released the accused on a recognizance with conditions.

Criminal Law - Topic 3309

Compelling appearance - Detention and release - Interim release or detention of accused pending trial or appeal - Release - When available - The accused applied to review a Provincial Court judge's refusal to release him pending trial - There were a number of charges outstanding against the accused, some of which involved the alleged use of force or the making of threats - The accused had a criminal record - Alcohol was a common denomi­nator in the charges and his past convic­tions - The accused spent two months in custody - The accused entered into a personal recognizance for $50,000 - His mother and friends became sureties - There would be a delay until the accused's trial - The Newfoundland Supreme Court, Trial Division, released the accused on a recognizance with conditions.

Criminal Law - Topic 3326

Compelling appearance - Detention and release - Trial delay - Review of release or detention pending trial or appeal - Scope of review of order made pending trial - The accused applied under s. 520 of the Criminal Code to review a Provincial Court judge's refusal to release him pend­ing trial - The Newfoundland Supreme Court, Trial Division, stated that the court had the authority under s. 520 to substitute its discretion for that of the Provincial Court judge and was not restricted to simply considering whether or not the judge erred in law or principle - The court stated that it had to exercise its discretion judicially and in accordance with the prin­ciples of the Criminal Code - See para­graph 1.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Rizzuto (1987), 67 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 267; 206 A.P.R. 267 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 1].

R. v. Braun (D.) (1994), 120 Sask.R. 189; 68 W.A.C. 189; 91 C.C.C.(3d) 237 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Pearson (E.), [1992] 3 S.C.R. 665; 144 N.R. 243; 52 Q.A.C. 1; 77 C.C.C.(3d) 124, refd to. [para. 3].

R. v. Morales (M.), [1992] 3 S.C.R. 711; 144 N.R. 176; 51 Q.A.C. 161; 77 C.C.C.(3d) 90, (addendum) 147 N.R. 335, refd to. [para. 3].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 11(e) [para. 3].

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 520 [para. 4].

Counsel:

Jerome Kennedy, for the applicant;

Del Atwood, for the respondent.

This application was heard on December 14, 1994, before Roberts, J., of the New­foundland Supreme Court, Trial Division, who delivered the following judgment orally and filed the decision on December 19, 1994.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT