2 total
Conviction quashed and proceedings stayed due to unreasonable delay violating s. 11(b) of the Charter.
The accused was found guilty of communicating with a person under 14 for the purpose of facilitating child pornography.
Prior to sentencing, the accused brought an application for a stay of proceedings under s. 11(b) of the Charter, alleging unreasonable delay.
The court applied the transitional framework from Jordan and the Morin guidelines, finding a total delay of 47 months after deducting defence delay.
The Crown failed to establish exceptional circumstances to justify the delay exceeding the 30-month ceiling.
The court concluded the accused's rights were violated, quashed the conviction, and entered a stay of proceedings.
A valid breath demand by an arresting officer is a continuing demand that does not require the breath technician to form independent grounds.
The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol and having over 80 mg of alcohol per 100 ml of blood.
Following a trial with a blended voir dire, the court considered whether the arresting officer had reasonable and probable grounds to make a breath demand and whether the breath technician was required to have independent grounds.
The court found that the arresting officer had sufficient grounds based on observations of erratic driving, physical indicators of impairment, and odour of alcohol.
The court held that the breath demand was valid and that the breath technician need not have independent grounds, as the demand is a continuing one made by the arresting officer and administered by the technician in an agency capacity.
