R. v. Testroete

R. v. Testroete

The court calculated total delay from the information date (May 28, 2015) to the anticipated end of trial (May 17, 2017) as ~23.5 months, deducted 5.5 months attributable to defence unavailability/implicit waiver yielding a net 18 months; after subtracting delay attributable to multiple discrete exceptional events (weather, witness illness/absence, disclosure issues and agreed facts, scheduling constraints) the remaining delay fell below the Jordan presumptive ceiling; Crown met its burden to justify the excess time as exceptional circumstances and no s.11(b) breach was found, so the stay was dismissed.

Citation
2017 NSPC 50
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Thomas Lee Testroete
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Section 11(b) Charter Unreasonable Delay Application Following Completion of Evidence (stay Application)
Outcome
Section 11(b) application dismissed; no stay of proceedings ordered; matter to proceed to substantive resolution
Legal Topics
Section 11(b) Reasonable Time, Stay of Proceedings, Jordan Framework, Exceptional Circumstances, Defence Delay Deduction, Transitional Exceptional Circumstances
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Charter Litigation Procedural Law Section 11(b) Reasonable Time Stay of Proceedings Jordan Framework Exceptional Circumstances +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 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Thomas Lee Testroete

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Section 11(b) Charter Unreasonable Delay Application Following Completion of Evidence (stay Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When the constitutional 'clock' starts for s.11(b) purposes
  2. 2 How to calculate and deduct defence delay under Jordan/Cody
  3. 3 Whether net delay exceeds the presumptive ceiling (18 months)

Ratio Decidendi

The court calculated total delay from the information date (May 28, 2015) to the anticipated end of trial (May 17, 2017) as ~23.5 months, deducted 5.5 months attributable to defence unavailability/implicit waiver yielding a net 18 months; after subtracting delay attributable to multiple discrete exceptional events (weather, witness illness/absence, disclosure issues and agreed facts, scheduling constraints) the remaining delay fell below the Jordan presumptive ceiling; Crown met its burden to justify the excess time as exceptional circumstances and no s.11(b) breach was found, so the stay was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Section 11(b) application dismissed; no stay of proceedings ordered; matter to proceed to substantive resolution

Orders

  • Section 11(b) Charter application dismissed
  • No stay of proceedings entered; trial to proceed to closing submissions/orders as applicable