United States of America v. Virdi, (2016) 390 B.C.A.C. 272 (CA)

• Judge: Neilson, Garson and Savage, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: July 07, 2016
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (2016), 390 B.C.A.C. 272 (CA);2016 BCCA 291

USA v. Virdi (2016), 390 B.C.A.C. 272 (CA);

    673 W.A.C. 272

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2016] B.C.A.C. TBEd. JL.023

Attorney General of Canada on behalf of the United States of America (respondent/requesting state) v. Jasvir Singh Virdi (appellant/person sought)

Jasvir Singh Virdi (applicant) v. Minister of Justice (respondent)

(CA42370; 2016 BCCA 291)

Indexed As: United States of America v. Virdi

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Neilson, Garson and Savage, JJ.A.

July 7, 2016.

Summary:

Virdi (a Canadian) pleaded guilty (plea deal) in the United States to failing to report on the exportation of a monetary instrument (entered United States with almost $150,000 in undeclared cash secreted on his person and in his vehicle). He failed to appear for sentencing. The United States sought Virdi's extradition to sentence him for the currency offence and to prosecute him for failing to appear. Virdi was committed for extradition and the Minister of Justice subsequently ordered his extradition. Virdi appealed the committal order and sought judicial review of the Minister's decision to surrender him.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and denied judicial review. Virdi conceded that there was no reviewable error in the extradition judge's decision to commit him for sentencing on the currency offence. Respecting his committal for failing to appear, the extradition judge did not err in finding that a reasonable jury, properly instructed, could convict Virdi of this offence. The surrender order was upheld. It was not unjust and oppressive. The court rejected Virdi's argument that the Minister erred in failing to find that the delay in the extradition proceedings was inordinate and violated the principles of fundamental justice, that his extradition would violate his s. 6(1) Charter mobility rights, and that he was not extraditable under art. 2 of the Canada-United States Extradition Treaty.

Extradition - Topic 19

General - Bars to extradition - Delay - See paragraphs 29 to 43.

Extradition - Topic 23

General - Bars to extradition - Charter breaches - See paragraphs 29 to 43.

Extradition - Topic 3342

Surrender to demanding country - Conditions precedent - That surrender not be unjust or oppressive - See paragraphs 29 to 43.

Extradition - Topic 3947

Practice - Judicial review - Decision to surrender (incl. standard of review) - See paragraphs 29 to 43.

Counsel:

D. Markovitz, for the appellant;

A. Lord, for the respondent.

This appeal and judicial review were heard on May 11, 2016, at Vancouver, B.C., before Neilson, Garson and Savage, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal.

On July 7, 2016, Neilson, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.