Skip to content

The ReeveLaw Blog

Criminal Defence Law Blog

DOES THE “JORDAN” CEILING OF 18 MONTHS APPLY TO YOUTHS? – In R. v. Jordan the S.C.C. protected the constitutional right to trial within a reasonable time by setting a presumptive ceiling of 18 months in Ontario Court proceedings. The court decided that the same ceiling applies to youth justice court proceedings. The clock runs at the same rate for youths. At least for now.

Posted bywpengine 15 November 2019

Source: R. v. K.J.M. – SCC Cases (Lexum)

Posted bywpengine15 November 2019Posted inUncategorized

Post navigation

Previous post Previous post:
PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES – Do we have them or not? Does an accused person have the right to participate in the selection of the jury that is going to try him? Nobody knows. It makes it extremely difficult to pick a jury. This is an excellent example of how hard cases make bad law.
Next post Next post:
WHY DO WE WEAR GOWNS IN COURT? – “The centuries-old tradition of gowning in court is overdue for a modernization.” Yes, it is tradition but the Canadian Bar Association is advocating for exceptions such as pregnancy or other personal circumstances, such as medical conditions or disabilities. I ask why we, now well into the 21st century, continue to wear gowns at all.

Recent Posts

  • “POLITICIANS CAN NEVER RESIST THE URGE TO TURN A MESSY LEGAL CASE INTO A CHEAP POLITICAL PROP” This refers specifically to DOUG FORD and PIERRE POILIEVRE. But then, the lack of knowledge of the facts never restrains their political proclamations. Michael Spratt explains:
  • THE DIRTY TRICK OF SPEED CAMERAS – It’s about making common conduct an offence for money. Their real purpose is to raise revenue and not to increase safety. The fact is that posted speed limits are not calibrated to the speed of the flow of traffic and are not intended to be strictly enforced. Travelling at or below the speed limit is usually, in practical terms, dangerous. (Try it some time.) Speed camera thresholds do not accommodate reality.
  • The Freedom Convoy’s favourite lawyer has been disbarred.
  • THIS APPLIES EQUALLY TO DANIELLE SMITH AND PIERRE POILIEVRE AS IT DOES TO DOUG FORD
  • You may be able to get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich but they won’t indict a salami sub.
The ReeveLaw Blog, Proudly powered by WordPress.