United States of America v. Tsioubris, (2001) 267 N.R. 201 (SCC)

• Judge: McLachlin, C.J.C., Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie and Arbour, JJ.
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Case Date: March 24, 2000
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2001), 267 N.R. 201 (SCC);2001 SCC 20;152 CCC (3d) 292;197 DLR (4th) 67;[2001] 1 SCR 613;145 OAC 1

USA v. Tsioubris (2001), 267 N.R. 201 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

Temp. Cite: [2001] N.R. TBEd. AP.007

James Tsioubris (appellant) v. The United States of America (respondent)

(27774; 2001 SCC 20)

Indexed As: United States of America v. Tsioubris

Supreme Court of Canada

McLachlin, C.J.C., Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie and Arbour, JJ.

April 5, 2001.

Summary:

The accused, a Canadian citizen resident in Canada, faced fraud charges in Penn­sylvania. The United States applied to extra­dite the accused. The accused opposed ex­tradition, claiming, inter alia, that his s. 7 Charter rights would be viol­ated if he was extradited because of state­ments made by the American judge assigned to the case and the prosecu­tor. He also claimed that the United States did not make out a prima facie case and that there was undue delay.

The Ontario Court (General Division), in a decision reported at 42 O.T.C. 288, held that the United States made out a prima facie case. The court dismissed the delay applica­tion. The court held that it had jurisdiction to hear Charter arguments. The court ordered that the extradition proceedings be stayed because the accused had been publicly threatened by the trial judge and the pros­ecuting attorney in a manner that violated his s. 7 Charter rights. The United States ap­pealed.

The Ontario Court of Appeal, in a decision reported 125 O.A.C. 122, allowed the appeal, set aside the stay and remitted the matter to the General Division. The accused appealed.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal for the reasons given in United States of America v. Cobb et al. 145 O.A.C. 3; 267 N.R. 203.

Cases Noticed:

United States of America v. Kwok (2001), 145 O.A.C. 36; 267 N.R. 310 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 1].

United States of America v. Cobb et al. (2001), 145 O.A.C. 3; 267 N.R. 203 (S.C.C.), folld. [para. 1].

United States of America v. Shulman (2001), 145 O.A.C. 201; 268 N.R. 115 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 1].

Counsel:

James Stribopoulos and Paul Cooper, for the appellant.

David Littlefield and Kevin Wilson, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Fleming, Breen, Toronto, Ontario, for the appellant.

Department of Justice, Toronto, Ontario, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on March 24, 2000, by McLachlin, C.J.C., Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie and Arbour, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada. On April 5, 2001, Arbour, J., delivered the following decision for the Court in both official lan­guages.