R. v. Johnson

R. v. Johnson

Accused failed to discharge the reverse onus on the balance of probabilities because, given the apparent strength of the Crown's case, the gravity and circumstances of the alleged offence (use of vehicle as weapon in a domestic context) and lack of confidence in the proposed sureties' ability to supervise and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2022 NSSC 393
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Terry Johnson
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Second‑degree Murder; Judicial Interim Release (bail) / Decision on Bail (show‑cause / Judicial Interim Release Hearing)
Outcome
Accused remanded in custody; detention ordered under s.522(2) Criminal Code
Legal Topics
Judicial Interim Release, Tertiary Ground S.515(10)(c), Reverse Onus (s.522), Public Confidence in Administration of Justice, Surety Suitability
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Constitutional/charter Law Pre‑trial Detention/bail Judicial Interim Release Tertiary Ground S.515(10)(c) Reverse Onus (s.522) Public Confidence in Administration of Justice Surety Suitability

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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Terry Johnson

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Second‑degree Murder; Judicial Interim Release (bail) / Decision on Bail (show‑cause / Judicial Interim Release Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether accused discharged reverse onus to justify release
  2. 2 Whether detention is justified under s.515(10)(c) (tertiary ground) to maintain public confidence
  3. 3 Whether proposed sureties and supervisory plan adequately mitigate risk of re‑offending or interference with administration of justice

Ratio Decidendi

Accused failed to discharge the reverse onus on the balance of probabilities because, given the apparent strength of the Crown's case, the gravity and circumstances of the alleged offence (use of vehicle as weapon in a domestic context) and lack of confidence in the proposed sureties' ability to supervise and control the accused, detention is necessary to maintain public confidence in the administration of justice under s.515(10)(c); accordingly the accused is remanded in custody under s.522(2).

Court Disposition

Accused remanded in custody; detention ordered under s.522(2) Criminal Code

Orders

  • Accused remanded in custody
  • Order pursuant to s.522(2) Criminal Code that accused be detained in custody