Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: CrimJ(P) 822/17 DATE: 2019 01 09

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN v. TAHJAI HANNAY

BEFORE: Dennison J.

COUNSEL: Veronica Puls, for the Crown Christian Levien, for Tahjai Hannay

ENDORSEMENT

[1] The accused is charged with robbery and breach of recognizance. Both counsel consented to severing the two counts. The robbery count will proceed before the jury as a separate trial. If necessary the breach of recognizance count will proceed after the trial before me. It is agreed that the evidence called at the robbery trial will apply.

[2] Counsel were not opposed to two alternate jurors being selected pursuant to s. 631(2.1) of the Criminal Code. I considered it “advisable in the interest of justice” pursuant to s. 631(2.1) to do so as I did not think it was likely that we would hear evidence on the same day that they jury was selected. As a result of this order Crown counsel and defence counsel were each granted 14 peremptory challenges. See s. 643(2.1) and s. 634(2)(b) of the Criminal Code.

[3] Both counsel agreed that a race-based challenge for cause pursuant to s. 638(1)(b) of the Criminal Code should be permitted. I am of the view that it is appropriate that a race-based challenge for cause be permitted as the accused is Black.

[4] Counsel also agreed to the form of the question. I reviewed it and found that it was an appropriate question.

[5] Both counsel agreed to have rotating triers. I am satisfied that it is appropriate to order pursuant to s. 640(2) and of the Criminal Code.

Dennison J. DATE: January 9, 2019