Cooper v. The Queen

The accused was charged under s. 79(1) (a) of the Criminal Code that he: "unlawfully did make or construct a home-made bomb with intent to cause an explosion of an explosive substance that is likely to cause serious bodily harm or death to persons or is likely to cause serious damage to property". He elected trial by judge and jury and the magistrate proceeded with a preliminary inquiry. After the Crown had adduced much of its evidence, the accused, through his counsel, addressed the Court and requested permission to re-elect to be tried by the magistrate, indicating that he wished to plead guilty to the charge. The magistrate assented to the request and the accused pleaded guilty. After further evidence was taken as to the circumstances of the offence charged, the accused was sentenced to six years' imprisonment. An appeal both as to conviction and sentence was dismissed by the Court of Appeal, one member of the Court dissenting. An appeal was then brought to this Court and the submission was made that the magistrate, once he had proceeded with the preliminary inquiry after the election by the accused against summary trial, had no jurisdiction to entertain a re-election and then proceed to convict the accused and sentence him.

Held: The appeal should be dismissed.

Cartwright C.J. and Martland, Judson, Hall and Spence JJ. R.C.S.

Ontario', dismissing appellant's appeal against his conviction by a magistrate following his re-election during the THE QUEN course of a preliminary inquiry.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE (orally for the Court) :-Mr. Meinhardt, we do not need to call upon you. We are all in agreement with the reasons of MacKay and McLennan JJ.A. in the Court of Appeal and accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

Droit criminel-Procks-Acte criminel-Privenu ayant choisi d'itre jugg par un juge et jury-Magistrat procidant a l'enqubte prgliminaire- Privenu obtenant la permission d'avoir son procks devant le magistrat et plaidant coupable-Le magistrat a-t-il la juridiction pour permettre au privenu de changer son option et pour le juger-Code criminel, 1958-54 (Can.), c. 51, art. 468.

L'appelant a 6t6 accus6 d'avoir fabriqu6 de ses propres mains une bombe avec l'intention de causer I'explosion d'une substance explosive qui 6tait susceptible de causer des lisions corporelles graves on la mort A des personnes ou de causer des dommages graves A la propridt6, le tout contrairement h l'art. 79(1) (a) du Code criminel. II a choisi d'Atre jug6 par un juge et un jury, et le magistrat a proc6d6 h I'enquite pr6liminaire. Une grande partie de la preuve de la Couronne avait 6t6 pr6sent6e lorsque l'appelant, par I'entremise de son avocat, a demand6 h la Cour la permission d'8tre jug6 par le magistrat, laissant entendre qu'il avait I'intention de plaider coupable. Le magistrat a accord6 cette requite et I'appelant a plaid6 coupable. Apris la pr6sentation d'une preuve relative aux circonstances de l'infraction, I'appelant a t6 condamn6 h un emprisonnement de six ans. Un appel de la d~claration de culpabilit6 et de la sentence a t6 rejet6 par un jugement majoritaire de la Cour d'appel. L'appelant en a appel6 h cette Cour. soutient que le magistrat, ayant commenc6 I'enquite pr6liminaire apris l'option faite par le pr6venu h l'encontre d'un procbs sommaire, n'avait pas la juridiction pour accorder le changement d'option et de juger le prevenu.

Arrdt: L'appel doit 6tre rejet6.

APPEL d'un jugement de la Cour d'appel de 1'Ontariol, rejetant l'appel d'une d6claration de culpabilit6 prononc6e par un magistrat apr~s que l'appelant eut choisi d'8tre 1 [19681 1 O.R. [1968] 2 C.C.C. 104, 2 C.R.N.S. 387.

S.C.R.

11968]