United States of America v. Dennis

United States of America v. Dennis

The certified ROC and SROC provide admissible evidence and permissible inferences that, on limited weighing, are reasonably capable of supporting committal for fraud under s.29(1)(a) because a reasonable properly instructed jury could convict on the mortgage‑fraud and bankruptcy‑fraud allegations; accordingly committal is ordered.

Citation
2014 BCSC 1437
Parties
Requesting State: United States of America (represented by the Attorney General of Canada); Person Sought/respondent: Barbara Jean Dennis aka Barbara Passmore aka Denise Bennett aka Barbara Branham aka Dennis Jones aka Susanna Brown
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 June 2014
Procedural Posture
Extradition / Committal Hearing (order to Await Surrender Under S.29(1)(a))
Outcome
Order of committal under s.29(1)(a) of the Extradition Act granted; respondent committed into custody to await surrender to the United States of America.
Legal Topics
Committal, Admissibility of Foreign Documentary Evidence, Corresponding Offence Analysis, Limited Weighing of Evidence, Co‑conspirator and Accomplice Evidence
Source Language
English
Extradition Criminal Law Fraud Bankruptcy Committal Admissibility of Foreign Documentary Evidence Corresponding Offence Analysis Limited Weighing of Evidence +1 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

United States of America (represented by the Attorney General of Canada)

Requesting State

Barbara Jean Dennis aka Barbara Passmore aka Denise Bennett aka Barbara Branham aka Dennis Jones aka Susanna Brown

Person Sought/respondent

Procedural Posture

Extradition / Committal Hearing (order to Await Surrender Under S.29(1)(a))

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ROC and SROC constitute admissible evidence under ss.32‑35 of the Extradition Act and Article 10(2) of the Canada‑US Treaty
  2. 2 Whether the evidence, on limited weighing, is sufficient to justify committal under s.29(1)(a) of the Extradition Act
  3. 3 Whether the alleged mortgage and bankruptcy conduct correspond to the Canadian offence of fraud (Criminal Code s.380)

Ratio Decidendi

The certified ROC and SROC provide admissible evidence and permissible inferences that, on limited weighing, are reasonably capable of supporting committal for fraud under s.29(1)(a) because a reasonable properly instructed jury could convict on the mortgage‑fraud and bankruptcy‑fraud allegations; accordingly committal is ordered.

Court Disposition

Order of committal under s.29(1)(a) of the Extradition Act granted; respondent committed into custody to await surrender to the United States of America.

Orders

  • Respondent committed into custody to await surrender pursuant to s.29(1)(a) of the Extradition Act
  • Attorney General of Canada to prepare a formal order of committal in accordance with s.29(2) of the Extradition Act