The applicant sought a stay of proceedings for child pornography charges, alleging a breach of his s. 11(b) Charter right to trial without unreasonable delay.
The court analyzed the 53-month delay under both the Morin and Jordan frameworks, attributing periods to neutral/inherent time, defence responsibility, Crown responsibility, and institutional delay, as well as an exceptional circumstance (police witness illness).
The court found no Charter breach, noting defence consent to trial dates and counsel's schedule contributing to delay, and applied the transitional exceptional circumstance category from Jordan.
