Court of Appeal for Ontario

CITATION: Sampson v. Canada (Attorney General), 2010 ONCA 103

DATE: 20100204

DOCKET: C48389

Weiler, Gillese and MacFarland JJ.A.

BETWEEN

Roger Sampson

Appellant

and

The Attorney General of Canada

Respondent

Michael S. Mandelcorn and R. Michael Rode, for the appellant

Brian Harvey, for the respondent

Heard and released orally: February 1, 2010

On appeal from the decision refusing to grant a writ of habeas of Justice A.D. Sheffield corpus on March 16, 2007.

ENDORSEMENT

[1] We see no error in Sheffield J.’s decision that the decision to transfer the appellant from a minimum security institution to a medium security institution was done with procedural fairness and based on reliable evidence.

[2] There is a difference between the use of confidential information alleging a crime in a criminal proceeding and its use, as in this case, to make an administrative decision to transfer the appellant to a higher security setting. The requirement that the information was reliable was satisfied by the evidence of the security information officer, Officer Burrell. He testified that the informant was reliable and had always been reliable in the past. The fact that the correctional services reliability guideline document was not used is a procedural omission that, in the circumstances, is of no import. Officer Burrell was extensively cross-examined on the reliability of the informant.

[3] The appellant did not face an accusation in the abstract. While the exact date of the first report is not pinpointed the time frame is. The nature of the infraction is also clear. While the incident itself was not corroborated, the risk concern that the reported incident pointed to was supported by other information.

[4] The decision to transfer was not unreasonable.

“K.M. Weiler J.A.”

“E.E. Gillese J.A.”

“J. MacFarland J.A.”