R. v. Rayner
- Citation
- 2024 BCSC 2213
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Supreme Court of British Columbia
- Decision
- 29 November 2024
- Posture
- Criminal Application for Disclosure and Preparatory Relief for Habeas Corpus Challenge to Out of Province Conviction / Application Hearing (oral Reasons)
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of British Columbia
- Decision
- 29 November 2024
- Posture
- Criminal Application for Disclosure and Preparatory Relief for Habeas Corpus Challenge to Out of Province Conviction / Application Hearing (oral Reasons)
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court dismissed the applications because it lacked jurisdiction to grant the disclosure and other orders sought concerning Mr. Rayner's Prince Edward Island conviction; assistance was provided to obtain forms to withdraw the 2010 abandonment and the court identified alternative avenues of relief but granted no substantive relief itself.
Court disposition
Applications dismissed as outside the jurisdiction of this Court.
Orders
- Applications dismissed as outside the jurisdiction of this Court.
- Reasons to be transcribed and provided to Mr. Rayner to assist him in pursuing proper provincial or federal avenues.
- No relief granted regarding disclosure or transcripts by this Court.
02
Material facts
Parties
Rex
Crown/prosecution Counsel: L.A. Vizsolyi (appearing as amicus curiae)John David Rayner
Applicant/defendant Counsel: J.D. Rayner (self-represented)Amounts and remedies
- Parole Ineligibility Years: 25
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Application for Disclosure and Preparatory Relief for Habeas Corpus Challenge to Out of Province Conviction / Application Hearing (oral Reasons)
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the Supreme Court of British Columbia had jurisdiction to grant the disclosure and other orders sought relating to a Prince Edward Island conviction
- 02
Whether habeas corpus or related remedies in this Court could be used to obtain documents or orders concerning the basis of an out-of-province conviction
- 03
What procedural steps are available to withdraw an abandonment of appeal and other avenues of review
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Mr. Rayner sought orders under the Supreme Court Civil Rules to obtain disclosure and other relief to prepare a habeas corpus application challenging the basis of his Prince Edward Island conviction, including alleged refusal by the Attorney General of Prince Edward Island to provide trial transcripts.
- Respondent
- The Crown, appearing as amicus, submitted the British Columbia court lacked jurisdiction to grant the relief sought; assisted by contacting the Prince Edward Island Court of Appeal to provide forms to withdraw the 2010 abandonment; and identified alternate remedies including applications to the Supreme Court of Canada and to the Minister of Justice.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Reasons for Judgment (2024 BCSC 2213) and Supreme Court Criminal Rules
A provincial superior court does not have jurisdiction to grant the extraterritorial orders sought in relation to the conviction and proceedings of another province when those remedies are not available by habeas corpus or other recognized routes in that court.
- 02
Reasons for Judgment (2024 BCSC 2213) and procedural rules of the Prince Edward Island Court of Appeal
Where an appellant has abandoned an appeal, procedural mechanisms exist to apply to withdraw that abandonment and other appellate or federal remedies may be available; intermediary courts may facilitate access to correct forms and guidance but cannot exercise jurisdiction they do not have.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court dismissed the applications because it lacked jurisdiction to grant the disclosure and other orders sought concerning Mr. Rayner's Prince Edward Island conviction; assistance was provided to obtain forms to withdraw the 2010 abandonment and the court identified alternative avenues of relief but granted no substantive relief itself.
Obiter and limits
- The applicant has a Grade 4 education and limited capacity to process legal steps which the court noted and attempted to facilitate by ensuring access to correct forms
- The court expressed gratitude for amicus assistance and ordered reasons be transcribed to guide the applicant
Court disposition
Applications dismissed as outside the jurisdiction of this Court.
- Applications dismissed as outside the jurisdiction of this Court.
- Reasons to be transcribed and provided to Mr. Rayner to assist him in pursuing proper provincial or federal avenues.
- No relief granted regarding disclosure or transcripts by this Court.
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court of British Columbia · 29 November 2024
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Judgment· 29 November 2024
2024 BCSC 2213 R. v. Rayner
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: R. v. Rayner, 2024 BCSC 2213 Date: 20241129 Dockets: 35751-1; 35751-2 Registry: Vancouver Rex v. John David Rayner Before: The Honourable Madam Justice Duncan Oral Reasons for Judgment Re: Application for disclosure and other relief pursuant to the Supreme Court Criminal Rules Counsel for the Provincial Crown appearing as amicus curiae via videoconference: L.A. Vizsolyi Appearing on his own behalf via videoconference: J.D. Rayner Place and Date of Trial/Hearing: Vancouver, B.C. November 29, 2024 Place and Date of Judgment: Vancouver, B.C. November 29, 2024 [1] THE COURT: This is an application by a federal inmate, John David Rayner, for a variety of orders pursuant to the Supreme Court Civil Rules. Mr. Rayner seeks the orders to prepare for an eventual habeas corpus application. [2] During the course of this hearing, it became clear to me that the orders Mr. Rayner seeks relate solely to the basis for his conviction in Prince Edward Island. I will provide some background. [3] According to the materials filed by Mr. Rayner, he was arrested on December 9, 2005, in Prince Edward Island for first degree murder. He was convicted of first degree murder on June 15, 2007, and sentenced to imprisonment for life with no parole eligibility for 25 years. At some point after the conviction, Mr. Rayner, or someone on his behalf, filed a
notice of appeal against the conviction. On August 26, 2010, Mr. Rayner abandoned his conviction appeal via a handwritten letter to a Sheila Gallant at the Prince Edward Island Court of Appeal. [4] Since sometime after abandoning his conviction appeal, Mr. Rayner has determined that he has grounds to challenge some of the rulings of the trial judge. I do not need to go into more detail than to say the rulings seem to be focused on DNA evidence relied on to find Mr. Rayner guilty of first degree murder. [5] Mr. Rayner, with the assistance of a fellow inmate, began filing a flurry of materials in the B.C. Supreme Court seeking relief by way of disclosure or other orders. Those orders relate solely to the basis for the conviction in Prince Edward Island, although a small part of the complaint is Mr. Rayner's allegation that he paid for transcripts of his trial but the Attorney General of Prince Edward Island has refused to provide them to him. [6] Mr. Rayner advises that he has a Grade 4 education and has some difficulty processing information and deciding what steps to take in furtherance of his wish to challenge his conviction. [7] As I explained to Mr. Rayner during the course of this hearing, there is no jurisdiction in this Court, by habeas corpus or otherwise, to issue the orders he is seeking. [8] Ms. Vizsolyi, Crown counsel, appeared as friend of the court. She has been
present on past applications by Mr. Rayner and has taken the time to contact the Prince Edward Island Court of Appeal to determine what Mr. Rayner needs to do. Ms. Vizsolyi advises that an official with the Prince Edward Island Court of Appeal is going to send Mr. Rayner the forms to apply to withdraw the 2010 abandonment of his appeal. It does not appear he has received those forms yet. [9] Mr. Rayner is now also aware that if he is unsuccessful in withdrawing the abandonment, he has avenues through applications to the Supreme Court of Canada and to the Minister of Justice for Canada. [10] Therefore, Mr. Rayner's applications are dismissed as being outside the jurisdiction of this Court, but I am hopeful that he will be provided with the correct forms to fill out in the near future. [11] I am very grateful to Ms. Vizsolyi's involvement and assistance with this matter and I will have these reasons transcribed in the hope that Mr. Rayner's path forward is directed to the correct provincial or federal court of jurisdiction. "Duncan J."
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.