M. Wlodarczyk

Following findings of guilt on two counts of uttering threats, the defendant sought to schedule a s. 11(b) Charter application for a stay of proceedings for unreasonable delay.

The court declined to hear the application, holding that the defendant failed to comply with her duty to raise delay proactively and in a timely manner, having made a tactical decision to await the trial outcome before pursuing the application, contrary to the principles established in R. v. J.F. and R. v. MacLaughlin.

The Crown appealed the dismissal of an impaired driving charge against the respondent.

The trial judge had dismissed the charge on the basis that the Crown failed to prove the identity of the offender because there was no in-court dock identification.

The Superior Court of Justice allowed the appeal, finding that the trial judge erred in law by concluding the identification evidence was insufficient.

The uncontroverted circumstantial evidence, including the arresting officer's lifelong knowledge of the respondent and the signing of a Promise to Appear, was sufficient to prove identity.

The matter was remitted for a new trial.