R. v. Maracle, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 86
Mark John Maracle Appellant
v.
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. Maracle
File No.: 26034.
1998: January 23.
Present: L’Heureux‑Dubé, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci
and Major JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario
Constitutional law ‑‑ Charter of Rights
‑‑ Trial within a reasonable time ‑‑ Trial judge ruling
that accused’s trial had been unreasonably delayed and ordering that charges be
stayed ‑‑ Whether Court of Appeal properly reversing stay.
Cases Cited
Referred to: R. v.
Askov, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1199; R. v. Morin, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal,
[1997] O.J. No. 1937 (QL), allowing the Crown’s appeal from a stay of
proceedings entered by the Ontario Court (General Division), [1996] O.J. No.
166 (QL), and ordering a trial. Appeal allowed, L’Heureux‑Dubé and
Iacobucci JJ. dissenting.
John R. Mann and Noëlle
Caloren, for the appellant.
Alexander Alvaro, for
the respondent.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
1 L’Heureux‑Dubé J. ‑‑ The majority of Cory, McLachlin and
Major JJ. would allow the appeal. In their view, the trial judge carefully
considered all the relevant factors referred to by this Court in Askov
and Morin and made no error in the manner in which he exercised his
discretion, L’Heureux‑Dubé and Iacobucci JJ. dissenting for the following
reasons. In their view, the Ontario Court of Appeal was correct in finding
error in the trial judge’s dealing with the period of delay and the matter of
prejudice to the appellant. Balancing all of the relevant guidelines from Askov
and Morin, the Court of Appeal properly reversed the stay ordered by the
trial judge and so they would accordingly dismiss the appeal.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellant: John R.
Mann, Port Elgin, Ontario.
Solicitor for the respondent: Alexander
Alvaro, Toronto.
Email this Content