R. v. Dempsey

R. v. Dempsey

The Court of Appeal division lacked jurisdiction under s.680 to entertain an application to vary or substitute a judicial interim release order based solely on changed circumstances and fresh evidence arising from a subsequent trial/mistrial that could not have been before the original judge; s.680 contemplates an appellate review on the record, not a de novo reconsideration of bail based on new materials.

Citation
2001 BCCA 122
Parties
Respondent (plaintiff): Regina; Appellant (defendant): Paul Dempsey
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 January 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal — Review Under S.680 Criminal Code / Application for Review of Judicial Interim Release (bail) After Mistrial
Outcome
Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; court declares it is without jurisdiction under s.680 to hear the application.
Legal Topics
Section 680 Criminal Code, Jurisdiction to Vary Bail, Fresh Evidence, Mistrial, Tertiary Ground for Bail, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Procedural Law Appellate Jurisdiction Bail/judicial Interim Release Section 680 Criminal Code Jurisdiction to Vary Bail Fresh Evidence Mistrial +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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent (plaintiff)

Paul Dempsey

Appellant (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Criminal — Review Under S.680 Criminal Code / Application for Review of Judicial Interim Release (bail) After Mistrial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a division of the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction under s.680 to vary or substitute a judicial interim release order based on changed circumstances arising from a subsequent trial/mistrial
  2. 2 Whether fresh evidence arising from the trial can be considered on a s.680 review
  3. 3 What standard of review applies to s.680 reviews (appeal on the record vs. hearing de novo)

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal division lacked jurisdiction under s.680 to entertain an application to vary or substitute a judicial interim release order based solely on changed circumstances and fresh evidence arising from a subsequent trial/mistrial that could not have been before the original judge; s.680 contemplates an appellate review on the record, not a de novo reconsideration of bail based on new materials.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; court declares it is without jurisdiction under s.680 to hear the application.

Orders

  • Declare the Court of Appeal division without jurisdiction under s.680 to hear the application
  • Dismiss the s.680 review application