R. v. Faulkner, 2010 ONSC 2591

CITATION : R. v. Faulkner, 2010 ONSC 2591 COURT FILE NO.: 10-30000240 COURT FILE NO.: 09-30000830 DATE: 20100503 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO RE: R. v. Ronald Faulkner BEFORE: Mr. Justice Marrocco COUNSEL: Ms. M. Pecknold, counsel for the Crown Mr. Faulkner, self-represented HEARD: April 28, 2010 ENDORSEMENT [ 1 ] The accused, Ronald Faulkner, was committed for trial on a number of charges. Included in those charges were four counts of failing to comply with a no communication order. These offences are alleged to have occurred between January 15 and February 9, 2009.

They appear as counts 16-19 on the indictment preferred December 1, 2009. [ 2 ] The factual allegations are quite straightforward. Mr. Faulkner was arrested on January 8, 2009. He appeared in the Ontario Court of Justice, located in Scarborough, Ontario on January 9, 2009. On that date, he consented to his own detention. A “no communication” order was made at that time. Finally, it is alleged that, while in custody, Mr. Faulkner, on four occasions, communicated with the complainant, contrary to the order resulting in counts 16-19. [ 3 ] A preliminary hearing was conducted in connection with counts 16-19 and Mr.

Faulkner was committed for trial on those counts. [ 4 ] Mr. Faulkner, who is self-represented on this motion, moves to quash the counts in question. Mr. Faulkner provided the court with the transcript of the proceedings on January 9, 2009. Suffice to say, a review of the transcript indicates that counsel for the Crown requested a “no communication” order. It also reveals that the Clerk of the Court asked for confirmation of the complainant's name.

The Justice of the Peace conducting the bail hearing did not specifically say that she was making the requested order. [ 5 ] The Crown suggested that the clear implication from the transcript was that the Justice of the Peace did, in fact, make the “no communication” order. The Crown suggested during the course of argument that she thought the order was attached to the detention order. [ 6 ] When Mr. Faulkner was committed for trial, the original Court of Justice documents were, in accordance with the general practice, forwarded to this court.

A review of those documents revealed a document entitled, “Instructions for Preparation of Warrant for Committal in Form 8”. This document is dated January 9, 2009. It purports to be signed by the Justice of the Peace who conducted the bail hearing. The form contains a checklist of items that are required to be in the Warrant for Committal. One of the items on the checklist confirms whether a “no communication” order has been made.

Contrary to the Crown's belief, this item has not been checked by the Justice of the Peace. [ 7 ] Accordingly, the Justice of the Peace gave no instructions in court or in her instructions to prepare a detention order to prepare a “no communication” order. [ 8 ] Having regard to all the evidence, I cannot find any evidence upon which a properly instructed jury could conclude that a “no communication” order was made against Mr. Faulkner on January 9, 2009. Accordingly, Mr. Faulkner's committal for trial on those counts is quashed. MARROCCO J. Date: 20100503