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
1The 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.
2Counsel 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.
3Both 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.
4Counsel also agreed to the form of the question. I reviewed it and found that it was an appropriate question.
5Both 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