R. v. Marshall

R. v. Marshall

The court exercised its discretionary power under the Criminal Code to grant the adjournment because the Defence presented an arguable abuse of process claim that required evidentiary foundation, there was no bad faith or negligence by Defence, witnesses and counsel would be available for rescheduling, and Defence waived raising s.11(b) in respect of the adjournment, such that the balance of administration of justice factors favored granting the adjournment.

Citation
2009 NSPC 6
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Donald Marshall Jr.
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 January 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Hearing on Application for Adjournment Prior to Trial
Outcome
Adjournment granted; further dates to be scheduled for hearing of abuse of process and for trial.
Legal Topics
Adjournment, Abuse of Process, Section 11(b) Reasonable Time, Disclosure, Stay of Proceedings
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Procedural Law Constitutional Law Adjournment Abuse of Process Section 11(b) Reasonable Time Disclosure Stay of Proceedings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Donald Marshall Jr.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Hearing on Application for Adjournment Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant an adjournment to permit Defence to prepare an abuse of process application
  2. 2 Whether the alleged abuse of process is arguable and requires evidence before trial proceeds
  3. 3 Whether granting an adjournment would prejudice the Crown or infringe s.11(b) rights

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretionary power under the Criminal Code to grant the adjournment because the Defence presented an arguable abuse of process claim that required evidentiary foundation, there was no bad faith or negligence by Defence, witnesses and counsel would be available for rescheduling, and Defence waived raising s.11(b) in respect of the adjournment, such that the balance of administration of justice factors favored granting the adjournment.

Court Disposition

Adjournment granted; further dates to be scheduled for hearing of abuse of process and for trial.

Orders

  • Adjournment granted and further dates to be set for a hearing on the abuse of process application and for the trial