W A R N I N G
The President of the panel hearing this appeal directs that the following should be attached to the file:
An order restricting publication in this proceeding under ss. 539(1), (2), (3) or (4) of the Criminal Code shall continue. These sections of the Criminal Code provide:
539(1) Prior to the commencement of the taking of evidence at a preliminary inquiry, the justice holding the inquiry
(a) may, if application therefor is made by the prosecutor, and
(b) shall, if application therefor is made by any of the accused, make an order directing that the evidence taken at the inquiry shall not be published in any document or broadcast or transmitted in any way before such time as, in respect of each of the accused,
(c) he or she is discharged; or
(d) if he or she is ordered to stand trial, the trial is ended.
(2) Where an accused is not represented by counsel at a preliminary inquiry, the justice holding the inquiry shall, prior to the commencement of the taking of evidence at the inquiry, inform the accused of his right to make application under subsection (1).
(3) Everyone who fails to comply with an order made pursuant to subsection (1) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
(4) [Repealed, 2005, c. 32, s. 18(2).] R.S., c. C-34, s. 467; R.S.C., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 97; 2005, c. 32, s. 18.
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
O’Connor A.C.J.O., Doherty and Blair JJ.A.
BETWEEN
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
and
Ioan-Florin Floria
Appellant
Ioan-Florin Floria, appearing in person
James V. Palangio and Chris Dwornikiewicz, for the respondent
Heard: March 1, 2011
On appeal from the decision of Justice Nordheimer of the Superior Court of Justice dated September 22, 2010.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
1The appeal is dismissed for the reasons given by Nordheimer J. For clarity, we add that the preliminary hearing judge was required to limit the evidence at the preliminary hearing so as to protect the information covered by the order of Croll J. The manner in which the preliminary hearing judge performed that duty was within her jurisdiction and within her discretion.