R. v. Shaw

R. v. Shaw

The court found the defence acted reasonably in pursuing third‑party RCMP records and reasonably relied on Crown assurances; the attributable defence delay totaled 208 days which, when deducted from the total 1,057 days, produced a net delay of 849 days (28 months 9 days), below the 30‑month presumption; consequently the s.11(b) application failed and a stay was denied.

Citation
2019 BCSC 1641
Parties
Accused/applicant: Garrett William Shaw; Crown/respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Possession of Cocaine for the Purpose of Trafficking; Jordan S.11(b) Application / Application for Stay Under S.11(b) and S.24(1) Charter (delay/jordan Motion)
Outcome
Application for stay dismissed; no stay of proceedings granted
Legal Topics
Delay/jordan Framework, Third‑party Disclosure, O'connor Applications, Section 11(b) Charter, Section 24(1) Charter
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Disclosure Law Procedural Law Delay/jordan Framework Third‑party Disclosure O'connor Applications Section 11(b) Charter +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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Garrett William Shaw

Accused/applicant

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown/respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Possession of Cocaine for the Purpose of Trafficking; Jordan S.11(b) Application / Application for Stay Under S.11(b) and S.24(1) Charter (delay/jordan Motion)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused's s.11(b) right to be tried within a reasonable time was breached
  2. 2 Characterization and attribution of delay arising from disclosure requests for third‑party RCMP records
  3. 3 Whether defence conduct in pursuing disclosure constitutes deductible defence delay

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the defence acted reasonably in pursuing third‑party RCMP records and reasonably relied on Crown assurances; the attributable defence delay totaled 208 days which, when deducted from the total 1,057 days, produced a net delay of 849 days (28 months 9 days), below the 30‑month presumption; consequently the s.11(b) application failed and a stay was denied.

Court Disposition

Application for stay dismissed; no stay of proceedings granted

Orders

  • Application under s.11(b) and s.24(1) dismissed