The accused was charged with Drive Over 80mg, Fail to Stop, and Fail to Remain contrary to the Criminal Code and Highway Traffic Act.
The accused brought a motion for a stay of proceedings pursuant to section 24(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, alleging a violation of his right to be tried within a reasonable time under section 11(b) of the Charter.
The court found that the total delay of 16 months and 17 days, comprising 13 months and 16 days of institutional and crown delay, substantially exceeded the Morin guidelines.
The primary cause of delay was the crown's failure to provide a working copy of the in-car camera video, which was essential disclosure.
The court found that the applicant acted diligently throughout and that the crown's inaction and poor communication regarding the video constituted unreasonable delay.
The court inferred prejudice based on the length and nature of the delay and granted the application for a stay of proceedings.
