R. v. Orr

R. v. Orr

Because the accused raised a serious Charter s.7 claim and factual circumstances (release without conditions then later unendorsed warrant) provided a sufficient basis to inquire into whether a warrant was justified, the court permitted a voir dire to determine the legality of the warrant issuance and potential remedies; the Crown's application to prohibit that challenge was dismissed.

Citation
2018 BCSC 2474
Parties
Crown/prosecution: Regina; Accused: Arlen Jeffrey Orr
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal (charter S.7 Application; Crown Vukelich Application) / Oral Ruling on Application for Voir Dire
Outcome
Voir dire allowed; Crown application to restrict accused from arguing the issue dismissed
Legal Topics
S.507(4) Criminal Code, Unendorsed Warrant Vs Summons, S.24(1) Charter Remedy (stay), Voir Dire Procedure, Presumption of Regularity
Source Language
English
Criminal Procedure Constitutional Law (charter) Judicial Review of Pre Charge Process S.507(4) Criminal Code Unendorsed Warrant Vs Summons S.24(1) Charter Remedy (stay) Voir Dire Procedure Presumption of Regularity

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown/prosecution

Arlen Jeffrey Orr

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (charter S.7 Application; Crown Vukelich Application) / Oral Ruling on Application for Voir Dire

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an unendorsed warrant under s.507(4) was properly issued instead of a summons
  2. 2 Whether a s.7 Charter breach arose from the warrant issuance and whether a s.24(1) stay is an available remedy
  3. 3 Whether a voir dire is required to determine the legality of the warrant issuance

Ratio Decidendi

Because the accused raised a serious Charter s.7 claim and factual circumstances (release without conditions then later unendorsed warrant) provided a sufficient basis to inquire into whether a warrant was justified, the court permitted a voir dire to determine the legality of the warrant issuance and potential remedies; the Crown's application to prohibit that challenge was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Voir dire allowed; Crown application to restrict accused from arguing the issue dismissed

Orders

  • Application by Crown to prohibit voir dire dismissed
  • Voir dire permitted to determine legality of issuance of unendorsed warrant and any Charter remedies