2 total
The court issued a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the lawfulness of an individual's detention following a review board disposition.
This is a first-stage ruling on a habeas corpus application brought by Andre Ducic, who asserts that his recent confinement at the Ottawa-Carleton Detention Centre was inconsistent with a disposition order of the Ontario Review Board.
The court finds that there is sufficient concern to warrant a full inquiry into the lawfulness of Mr. Ducic’s imprisonment and orders the matter to proceed to the second stage, requiring the responsible authorities to explain the legal basis for his detention.
Police notes of a psychotherapist's statement are protected records under the Criminal Code.
The applicant, charged with numerous sexual offences involving child complainants, brought a motion for directions to determine whether police notes and a psychotherapist's statement, which contained information from therapy sessions, constituted Stinchcombe disclosure or were subject to the Mills regime under the Criminal Code.
The Crown argued for the Mills regime.
The court found that the psychotherapist's statement, despite being in police possession, retained its character as a "record" under s. 278.1 of the Criminal Code due to the complainant's reasonable expectation of privacy.
Consequently, the court ruled that the production of the statement is governed by the Mills regime, requiring the applicant to follow that specific application process.
