R. v. Melvin

R. v. Melvin

The court holds it has jurisdiction to remand an unconvicted person to a federal institution under ss.515(11) and 516(1); such remands must be exceptional and supported by evidence; on the facts, prolonged segregation, repeated management failures in provincial institutions, and comparative conditions in federal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2016 NSSC 130
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: James Bernard Melvin; Accused: Regan Taylor Henneberry; Respondent: Correctional Service Canada; Respondent: Nova Scotia Department of Justice (Correctional Services Division)
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Pre‑trial Remand Application / Application for Federal Remand Under Ss. 515(11) and 516(1) of the Criminal Code
Outcome
Application granted; federal remand ordered in both matters.
Legal Topics
Remand, Custody, Segregation, Jurisdiction to Remand to Federal Facility, Treatment of Unconvicted Persons Under ICCPR
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Corrections International Law Administrative Law Remand Custody Segregation Jurisdiction to Remand to Federal Facility +1 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

James Bernard Melvin

Accused

Regan Taylor Henneberry

Accused

Correctional Service Canada

Respondent

Nova Scotia Department of Justice (Correctional Services Division)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Pre‑trial Remand Application / Application for Federal Remand Under Ss. 515(11) and 516(1) of the Criminal Code

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to remand an unconvicted person to a federal institution under s.515(11) and s.516(1) of the Criminal Code
  2. 2 What standard governs remand of an unconvicted person to a federal institution (i.e. whether 'exceptional circumstances' are required)
  3. 3 Whether the facts demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying federal remand

Ratio Decidendi

The court holds it has jurisdiction to remand an unconvicted person to a federal institution under ss.515(11) and 516(1); such remands must be exceptional and supported by evidence; on the facts, prolonged segregation, repeated management failures in provincial institutions, and comparative conditions in federal custody constituted exceptional circumstances warranting federal remand in both matters.

Court Disposition

Application granted; federal remand ordered in both matters.

Orders

  • Remand James Bernard Melvin to federal custody in CRH 447242 and CRH 447189
  • Transcribe and file the judge's reasons and comments for future judicial reference