Court File and Parties
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
DATE: 20231219 DOCKET: C68794 & C69873
Thorburn, Coroza and Copeland JJ.A.
DOCKET: C68794
BETWEEN
His Majesty the King Respondent
and
Roslyn Blake Appellant
DOCKET: C69873
AND BETWEEN
His Majesty the King Respondent
and
Claire Graham Appellant
Counsel: Marianne Salih, for the appellant Claire Graham Carlos Rippell and Alexander Ostroff, for the appellant Roslyn Blake Samuel Greene, for the respondent
Heard and released orally: December 14, 2023
On appeal from the convictions entered on October 2, 2019 by Justice M. Suranganie Kumaranayake of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting with a jury.
Reasons for Decision
[1] Assuming, without deciding, that Ms. Graham is able to bring the net Jordan [1] delay above 30 months with the new transcripts that were not before the trial judge at the time of the s. 11(b) Charter application, it would not change the result.
[2] In Ms. Blake’s s. 11(b) application, the application judge found that, although the net delay was moderately above 30 months, the complexity of the case justified the delay beyond the presumptive ceiling. The assessment of complexity for both matters is identical, as the appellants were co-accused. Jordan is clear that the assessment of complexity of a given case is a matter “well within the trial judge’s expertise” (at para. 79). Thus, the factual findings of the application judge are entitled to deference. We would not interfere with the finding of the application judge in Ms. Blake’s case that the complexity of the matter justified the additional delay. This finding is equally applicable to both appellants.
[3] It is not necessary to consider the Crown’s argument based on R. v. J.F., 2022 SCC 17, 468 DLR (4th) 216.
[4] The appeals are dismissed.
“Thorburn J.A.”
“S. Coroza J.A.”
“J. Copeland J.A.”