Reasons for Bail

R. v. J.S., 2020 ONSC 1710 (CanLII)

[1] Mr. S. brings a bail review pursuant to s. 520 of the Criminal Code. The review was heard by teleconference with consent of the parties. Mr. S. was not on the conference, but the sureties were present with defence counsel.

[2] The original bail hearing was a reverse onus because of the charges of possession for the purpose of trafficking of certain drugs. I note that the amounts of drugs involved, although clearly trafficking amounts if proven, are street level trafficking amounts, not higher level trafficking.

[3] The defence argues that the Justice of the Peace erred, and that there are also material changes in circumstances.

[4] The Crown opposes release. However, Crown counsel acknowledges that there are material changes in circumstances, both in terms of the new sureties presented, and in terms of the current risk situation posed by the coronavirus. Crown counsel indicated that he did not need to cross-examine the new sureties (and Mr. S.’s mother was cross-examined at the initial bail hearing).

[5] It is not necessary for me to decide if the Justice of the Peace erred, because I am satisfied that there are material changes in circumstances. There are two material changes: first, the new proposed sureties; and second, the new situation in relation to the Coronavirus which has developed in the past couple of weeks, after the decision of the Justice of the Peace.

[6] I note at the outset that the Crown only sought Mr. S.’s detention on the tertiary ground. Thus, there are no concerns raised under either the primary or secondary grounds. Mr. S. has no criminal record, and is a relatively young man, 20 years old.