R. v. M.T.S.

R. v. M.T.S.

Although YCJA s.29(2) creates a presumption against detention for young persons who could not be committed to custody under s.39(1)(a)-(c), that presumption is rebuttable; on the facts (escalating pattern of multiple recent vehicle thefts and breaches) the Crown rebutted the presumption on the secondary ground (protection of the public) but the Court nevertheless ordered release under YCJA s.31(1) to a responsible person (stepfather) because the stepfather was found able and the accused willing, subject to strict conditions designed to protect the public and ensure attendance.

Citation
2006 NSPC 8
Parties
Crown: R.; Accused (young Person): M.T.S.
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Youth Criminal Bail (judicial Interim Release) / Bail Hearing / Judicial Interim Release Decision
Outcome
Accused released to the care of a responsible person under YCJA s.31(1) despite Crown having rebutted presumption against custody
Legal Topics
Bail, Judicial Interim Release, Youth Criminal Justice Act, Reverse Onus, Responsible Person Undertaking, Release Conditions, Pre Trial Detention
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Youth Justice Procedural Law Bail Judicial Interim Release Youth Criminal Justice Act Reverse Onus Responsible Person Undertaking +2 more

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 7 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R.

Crown

M.T.S.

Accused (young Person)

Procedural Posture

Youth Criminal Bail (judicial Interim Release) / Bail Hearing / Judicial Interim Release Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether detention pending trial is justified under Criminal Code s.515(10) for a young person
  2. 2 Whether YCJA s.29(2) creates a presumption against detention and its interaction with Criminal Code reverse onus provisions (s.515(6), s.524(8))
  3. 3 Whether the Crown has rebutted the presumption against custody in this case

Ratio Decidendi

Although YCJA s.29(2) creates a presumption against detention for young persons who could not be committed to custody under s.39(1)(a)-(c), that presumption is rebuttable; on the facts (escalating pattern of multiple recent vehicle thefts and breaches) the Crown rebutted the presumption on the secondary ground (protection of the public) but the Court nevertheless ordered release under YCJA s.31(1) to a responsible person (stepfather) because the stepfather was found able and the accused willing, subject to strict conditions designed to protect the public and ensure attendance.

Court Disposition

Accused released to the care of a responsible person under YCJA s.31(1) despite Crown having rebutted presumption against custody

Orders

  • Accused to keep the peace and be of good behaviour
  • Accused to attend court as and when directed