This decision addresses an application by Robert Freedland seeking a stay of a section 117.05 firearms disposition proceeding on grounds of abuse of process, alleging the Crown reneged on an agreement made during his preliminary hearing and that the hearing is motivated by malice following his overturned conviction.
The court found no abuse of process, holding that the original agreement not to pursue firearms charges applied only to the criminal trial and did not immunize the applicant from the regulatory firearms disposition process.
The court also granted an order for an out-of-town Crown Attorney to conduct the section 117.05 hearing due to perceived fairness concerns but denied the request to summon former jurors to investigate alleged obstruction of justice, finding no evidentiary basis for such an order.
