Richards v. Springhill Institution (Warden) et al., 2014 NBQB 171
|Court:||Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick|
|Case Date:||June 26, 2014|
|Citations:||2014 NBQB 171;(2014), 423 N.B.R.(2d) 68 (TD)|
Richards v. Springhill Institution (2014), 423 N.B.R.(2d) 68 (TD);
423 R.N.-B.(2e) 68; 1103 A.P.R. 68
MLB headnote and full text
Sommaire et texte intégral
[French language version follows English language version]
[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]
Temp. Cite:  N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. SE.009
Renvoi temp.:  N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. SE.009
Ryan Ricardo Richards (applicant) v. CSC, Warden (Springhill Institution), Warden (Atlantic Institution), Warden (Dorchester Penitentiary) and the Attorney General of Canada (respondents)
(M/M/58/14; 2014 NBQB 171; 2014 NBBR 171)
Indexed As: Richards v. Springhill Institution (Warden) et al.
Répertorié: Richards v. Springhill Institution (Warden) et al.
New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench
Judicial District of Moncton
July 3, 2014.
An inmate applied for habeas corpus with certiorari in aid. The Crown raised the preliminary issue of the court's jurisdiction to hear the inmate's application.
The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, dismissed the inmate's application.
Habeas Corpus - Topic 12
General - Remedies available in habeas corpus proceedings - An inmate successfully challenged his security reclassification from medium security to maximum security and his transfer to a maximum security prison - The judge ordered that the inmate's security classification be returned to that of medium and that he be returned to a medium security institution - He was transferred to Dorchester Institution - The inmate filed another application for habeas corpus with certiorari in aid - The Crown raised the preliminary issue of the court's jurisdiction to hear the inmate's application - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, dismissed the inmate's application - "The authorities are clear that this Court shall not interfere with the administration of penal institutions. This Court cannot dictate where an inmate is to be sent. In addition, the custody and control rests with the warden of the institution where an inmate is detained. The only role this Court can play is in determining whether a deprivation of liberty has occurred and, if so, was it lawful. If there was a deprivation which was unlawful, this Court can only order the deprivation be changed to the appropriate deprivation of liberty. This Court cannot further order that an applicant be sent to a particular institution." - Habeas corpus was restricted and was not available for the relief claimed by the inmate.
Habeas Corpus - Topic 585
Jurisdiction to issue writ - New Brunswick Courts - Court of Queen's Bench - [See Habeas Corpus - Topic 12 ].
Habeas corpus - Cote 12
Généralités - Recours ouverts dans les requêtes d'habeas corpus - [Voir Habeas Corpus - Topic 12 ].
Habeas corpus - Cote 585
Délivrance du bref - Compétence - Tribunaux du Nouveau-Brunswick - Cour du Banc de la Reine - [Voir Habeas Corpus - Topic 585 ].
Wood v. Atlantic Institution, 2014 NBQB 135, refd to. [para. 9].
Ryan Ricardo Richards, per se;
Jill Chisholm, Department of Justice, on behalf of the respondents.
This application was heard on June 26, 2014, by Rideout, J., of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, Judicial District of Moncton, who delivered the following decision on July 3, 2014.
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP