Case Briefs
Database For Canadian Criminal Law

 R. v. Qureshi

List of Similar Cases | Add Data to This Case | Edit

 

  Home |Add a new case | List of Issues 
Search for a Case by Name, Cite, Issue, Facts and Reasons

Find A Case That Starts With

 

ID: 661

Title: R. v. Qureshi

Cite: Unreported (November 18, 2004)

Court: ON CA

Date: 08/10/2002

Justices: Laskin Rosenberg JJ.A. and Aitken J. (ad hoc)

Result: order a trial

WhoWon: P

Issue: Unreasonable Delay


Charges: Two counts of aggravated assult


 

Facts

The respondants Qureshi, Khan and Giavropoulos brutally attacked two young men - S and C - outside a Toronto nightclub. Qureshi punched S Khan pulled out a knife and stabbed him in the chest. When C tried to help his friend the Respondants also attacked him. Qureshi pinned C and Khan stabbed him 5 times in the chest and back. The 3 respondants were later arrested when running towards Giavropoulos's car. The police laid charges the next day. 51 months later, on October 8 2002, the trial judge stayed the charges. He concluded that the lengthy delay from the time charges were laid to the time of the trial violated the respodents' consititutional rights under s. 11(b) to be tried within a reasonable time. The Crown appeals, and submits that the trial judge committed 3 errors. 1. he failed to properly assess the inherent time requirements of the case; 2. He failed to take into account both the minimal prejudice to the respondants from the delay and the societal interest in having a trial on the merits; and 3. He erred in equating this court's judgement in R v. Satkunananthan (2001), 152 C.C.C. (3d) 321. Edit


Reasons

The unwaived delay of 44 months from charge date to trial date was not ideal, even for a 2 stage proceeding. The Crown did not move this case forward as aggressively as it might have. However, much of the delay was caused by the inherent time requirements of the case, which are neutral in the s. 11(b) assessment. The systemic delay was not outside the admisistrative guidelines suggested in Morin. The prejudice the respondents suffered from the delay was minimal. The charges are serious. A stay was not appropriate Edit


 

Click this link to Add Your Comments about: R. v. Qureshi

Click here to Add a Hyperlink re  R. v. Qureshi