Ivan Whitehall

The appellant was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment without parole eligibility for 25 years under Criminal Code provisions enacted after the offence was committed.

Had she been tried under the law in force at the time of the offence, her parole ineligibility would have been between 10 and 20 years.

After serving 10 years in an Ontario penitentiary, she applied for habeas corpus and Charter relief, arguing her continued detention under the 25-year ineligibility period violated s. 7 of the Charter.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the Ontario courts had jurisdiction to issue habeas corpus, that the remedy was appropriate to review the legality of her parole ineligibility, and that applying s. 7 to her continuing deprivation of liberty did not constitute a retrospective application of the Charter.

The Court declared her eligible for parole.

The appellant was convicted of gross indecency, found to be a dangerous offender, and sentenced to indeterminate detention prior to the enactment of the Charter.

Subsequently, gross indecency was removed from the definition of 'serious personal injury offence' in the Criminal Code.

The appellant sought habeas corpus and Charter relief, arguing his continued detention was unlawful because his offence no longer qualified for indeterminate detention.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the change in the law did not alter his status as a dangerous offender and his continued detention did not violate the Charter.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal that allowed the Crown's appeal from his acquittal on a charge of conspiracy to traffic in narcotics and ordered a new trial.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the Court of Appeal's reasons that the trial judge erred in failing to consider whether the Crown had established an agreement to send narcotics as disclosed in the particulars.