Accused found guilty after trial, 25 months after charges were laid (post-charge delay). Defence argued that for purposes of Jordan (2016 SCC 27), the clock started to run from the date police had completed investigation, over a year prior to accused being charged (pre-charge delay), bringing the total time to 37 months. This made the delay presumptively unreasonable in breach of s 11(b).
Held: No s 11(b) breach, application dismissed.
Per Morin, 1992 CanLII 89 (SCC), “[the length of the delay] requires the court to examine the period from the charge to the end of the trial. Charge means the date on which an information is sworn or an indictment is preferred…. Pre-charge delay may in certain circumstances have an influence on the overall determination as to whether post-charge delay is unreasonable but of itself it is not counted in determining the length of the delay.” Post-charge delay of 25 months was under presumptive ceiling of 30 months per Jordan, and no specific prejudice was alleged in post-charge period.
A. Konye – Defence Counsel