Docket: CACR2305 Alicija Jastrebske Appellant - v. -, 2014 SKCA 127

THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR SASKATCHEWAN Citation: 2014 SKCA 127 Date: 2014-11-27 Between: Docket: CACR2305 Alicija Jastrebske Appellant - and - Her Majesty the Queen Respondent Coram: Richards C.J.S., Lane and Ottenbreit JJ.A. Counsel: No one appearing for the appellant Katharine Grier for the respondent Appeal: From: Q.B.J. No. 13 of 2011, J.C. of Saskatoon; 2013 SKQB 150 Heard: November 27, 2014 Disposition: Appeals dismissed (orally)

Written Reasons: December 1, 2014 By: The Honourable Chief Justice Richards In Concurrence: The Honourable Mr. Justice Lane The Honourable Mr. Justice Ottenbreit Richards C.J.S. [ 1 ] Ms. Jastrebske was convicted of defrauding the Government of Canada (Canada Revenue Agency) in an amount exceeding $5,000 contrary to s. 380(1) of the Criminal Code and of fraudulently concealing or removing property of an amount greater than $50 within one year preceding bankruptcy, contrary to s. 198(1) (

f) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act , RSC 1985, c B-3. She was sentenced to a period of incarceration of five months. [ 2 ] Throughout the course of the preliminary inquiry, the pre-trial conferences and the trial, Ms. Jastrebske stridently denied the jurisdiction of the Court of Queen’s Bench. She refused to elect a mode of trial and, as a result, was tried before a judge and jury. The trial judge handled the proceedings with great courtesy and patience. [ 3 ] Ms. Jastrebske appeals both her convictions and her sentence. Her grounds of appeal are stated as follows in her notice of appeal: I. Breach of public official duties per Criminal Code ( s. 122 ?) in (

a) judicial neglect/refusal to confirm/establish jurisdiction, and (

b) numerous distortions and errors in comments of “sentencing” and address to jury; and II. Violation of fundamental, inherent rights of living soul used as surety on account. [ 4 ] The Crown was unable to locate Ms. Jastrebske for the purposes of serving its factum on her and Ms. Jastrebske did not appear in Court on November 27, 2014, the date set for the argument of her appeal. However, it is clear that she was aware of the hearing date because the Crown filed an email dated November 4, 2014 advising Ms. Jastrebske of the time and place of the appeal hearing.

Across the top of the email, the following message was printed, “Not Read – Not Recognized – No Liability Accepted For Your Own Accounting/Contract”. We are advised by counsel that the email was part of a package of correspondence recently received from Ms. Jastrebske by the federal Minister of Justice. We note, as well, that none of the correspondence sent by the Registrar to Ms. Jastrebske at her University of Saskatchewan mailing address, including the Hearing Notice, has been returned. All of this leads us to conclude that Ms.

Jastrebske was aware of the date and place of her appeal but chose not to participate in it. [ 5 ] We have reviewed the trial transcript and see no basis on which to interfere with the convictions in question here. The proceedings were fair. The jury was properly instructed and it made entirely reasonable findings of guilt. The sentence imposed by the trial judge was appropriate. [ 6 ] Ms. Jastrebske’s submissions with respect to “jurisdiction” have no substance. Indeed, they have no legal meaning of any kind. [ 7 ] Both Ms. Jastrebske’s conviction and sentence appeals are dismissed.