Court File and Parties

CITATION: R. v. Ethier, 2011 ONCA 588

DATE: 20110912

DOCKET: C51995 and C52447

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

Rosenberg, MacPherson and Epstein JJ.A.

BETWEEN

Her Majesty The Queen

Respondent

and

Reverend Brother Michel D. Ethier

Appellant

Counsel:

Reverend Brother Michel D. Ethier, in person

Kevin Wilson and Vanita Goela, for the respondent

Heard and endorsed: September 9, 2011

On appeal from the decision of Justice David Nadeau of the Superior Court of Justice, dated April 8, 2010 and from the decision of Justice Alfred Stong, of the Superior Court of Justice, dated June 16, 2010.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] The appellant, Reverend Brother Michael Ethier, was charged with possession of marijuana, possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking, and production of marijuana in the Municipality at West Nipissing. He brought an application seeking an order prohibiting prosecution of these charges against him as being offences unknown to law. On April 8, 2010, Justice Nadeau of the Superior Court of Justice dismissed the application and ordered the trial to proceed.

[2] The appellant was also charged with possession of marijuana in the Town of Bracebridge. He brought an application seeking an order prohibiting prosecution of these charges against him as being offences unknown to law. On June 16, 2010, Justice Stong of the Superior Court of Justice dismissed the application.

[3] The appellant appeals both decisions. His essential argument is that several decisions by different courts across Canada have invalidated the various provisions of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act under which he has been charged.

[4] We disagree. This court has expressly said that the provisions of the CDSA are “in full force and effect” in several cases: R. v. Hitzig (2003), 2003 CanLII 30796 (ON CA), 177 C.C.C. (3d) 449; R. v. Turmel (2003), 2003 CanLII 17130 (ON CA), 177 C.C.C. (3d) 533; and R. v. Turmel (2007), 2007 ONCA 133, 72 W.C.B. (2d) 501.

[5] The appeals are dismissed.