R. v. Gallo

R. v. Gallo

The reviewing judge concluded the Crown did not prove a substantial likelihood the accused would reoffend if released; the provincial judge either misapprehended or lacked information about the May 1 pullover such that the inference of notice and inevitable reoffending was not justified; given absence of prior...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2012 BCSC 1364
Parties
Respondent/crown: Regina; Accused/applicant: Dean Andrew Gallo
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Judicial Interim Release / Bail Review / Judicial Review of Detention Under S.515 (review of Provincial Court Detention)
Outcome
Detention order vacated and accused released on bail with strict conditions
Legal Topics
Judicial Interim Release, Secondary Ground Detention, Public Safety, Surety and Conditions of Release, Computer Use Prohibitions
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Bail and Judicial Interim Release Fraud Identity Theft Evidence Judicial Interim Release Secondary Ground Detention Public Safety +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent/crown

Dean Andrew Gallo

Accused/applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Judicial Interim Release / Bail Review / Judicial Review of Detention Under S.515 (review of Provincial Court Detention)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the provincial court judge erred in detaining the accused on the secondary ground under s.515(10) of the Criminal Code
  2. 2 Whether there has been a change in circumstances or other reason justifying vacating the original detention order
  3. 3 Whether strict bail conditions can reduce the risk of reoffending to an acceptable level

Ratio Decidendi

The reviewing judge concluded the Crown did not prove a substantial likelihood the accused would reoffend if released; the provincial judge either misapprehended or lacked information about the May 1 pullover such that the inference of notice and inevitable reoffending was not justified; given absence of prior breaches and available strict conditions (including surety and cash deposit) the danger could be reduced to an acceptable level, so continued detention was not necessary and the detention order was vacated.

Court Disposition

Detention order vacated and accused released on bail with strict conditions

Orders

  • Keep the peace and be of good behaviour.
  • Appear before this Court when required.