R. v. Bennett, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 168

Reginald Bennett Appellant

v.

Her Majesty The Queen Respondent

Indexed as: R. v. Bennett

File No.: 22532.

1992: June 5.

Present: L'Heureux‑Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, McLachlin and Iacobucci JJ.

on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario

Constitutional law ‑‑ Charter of Rights ‑‑ Trial within a reasonable time ‑‑ Delay in this case not unreasonable.

Cases Cited

Applied: R. v. Morin, 1992 CanLII 89 (SCC), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal (1991), 1991 CanLII 2701 (ON CA), 3 O.R. (3d) 193, 46 O.A.C. 99, 64 C.C.C. (3d) 449, 6 C.R. (4th) 22, 7 C.R.R. (2d) 145, allowing the Crown's appeal from a stay of proceedings ordered by Stortini J. (1990), 11 W.C.B. (2d) 461. Appeal dismissed.

Melvyn Green, for the appellant.

David Butt, for the respondent.

The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

//L'Heureux-Dubé J.//

L'Heureux‑Dubé J. ‑‑ It will not be necessary to hear from you Mr. Butt. The Court is ready to hand down judgment. The judgment will be pronounced by Mr. Justice Sopinka.

//Sopinka J.//

Sopinka J. ‑‑ This appeal as of right is governed by the principles expressed in R. v. Morin, 1992 CanLII 89 (SCC), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771, released March 26, 1992. We do not share the views of the appellant with respect to the emphasis placed on statistics. Applying the factors in Morin, we agree with the conclusion reached by the Court of Appeal that there was no unreasonable delay in this case. The appeal is therefore dismissed.

Judgment accordingly.

Solicitors for the appellant: Ruby & Edwardh, Toronto.

Solicitor for the respondent: The Attorney General for Ontario, Toronto.