News @ Cooper, Sandler, Shime & Bergman LLP - Toronto Criminal Law Firm

Extradition or I'm Leaving on a Jet Plane, Don't Know When I'll Be Back Again
Published: July 04, 2011

Paper Presented at Federation of Law Societies National Criminal Law Program, Quebec City, July, 2011, Section G.2.1

Author:  Mark J. Sandler

Introduction

Generally, extradition is the surrender by one country to another of a person charged with, or convicted of, a crime in the requesting country. Canada’s Extradition Act, and a series of treaties to which it is a party, contemplate extradition both to and from Canada.

Prior to the significant revisions to the Extradition Act in 1999, our extradition regime – particularly as it related to requests from other countries for the surrender of individuals in Canada – was widely criticized (rightly or wrongly) for being overly complicated, burdened by undue delays and unnecessary evidentiary requirements imposed on requesting countries. With the passage of the Extradition Act S.C. 1999, c. 18, such criticisms have been replaced by expressed concerns (again, rightly or wrongly) that the current regime sacrifices procedural and substantive fairness at the altar of international comity and expediency.


The Right to Counsel on Arrest or Detention: Implementation Duties
Published: July 04, 2011

Paper Presented at Federation of Law Soecities National Criminal Law Program, Quebec City, July, 2011, Section L.2

Author:  Mark J. Sandler

Nature of the Duty

Section 10(b) of the Charter provides that everyone has the right on arrest or detention to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right.

The language of s. 10(b) and the existing jurisprudence tell us that s. 10(b) consists of an informational component and an implementational component. 

 


Grant and Suberu: The Supreme Court's Synthesis of the Law of Detention and Search Incident to Investigative Detention
Published: February 05, 2011

Paper Written for the OBA Institute 2011

Author: Scott Bergman and Corie Langdon

[A]       INTRODUCTION

The Supreme Court of Canada has recently clarified the law in relation to the rights protected by ss. 8, 9, 10(a) and 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  In the companion cases of R. v. Grant[3]and R. v. Suberu[4], the Supreme Court of Canada provided much needed guidance in understanding when an exchange between a police officer and a civilian becomes a detention, thereby engaging the civilian’s Charter rights. These cases have also clearly articulated when a detained person’s right to counsel is engaged.  In clarifying the interplay between investigative interrogation and investigative detention, Grant and Suberu have provided a new analytical “toolbox” to assist in the analysis of arbitrary investigative detentions and unreasonable searches.  This paper will explore what ‘tools’ Grant and Suberu have provided, and how these tools have been used by judges in their assessment of claims of arbitrary detentions and unreasonable searches following those detentions. 

 


Sexual Assault Law in Ontario
Published: June 23, 2010

Paper Presented At Federation of Law Societies National Criminal Law Program St. John's Nfld., July, 2010, Section 0.1
Author: Mark J. Sandler

Introduction

This paper briefly examines the offence of sexual assault. Other papers address sexual interference and related offences (O.2), and common defences to crimes of a sexual nature, namely consent (P.1) and mistaken belief in consent (P.2).

Section 271 of the Criminal Code provides that every one who commits a sexual assault is guilty of either an indictable offence (punishable by a term of imprisonment not exceeding two years) or a summary conviction offence (punishable by a term of imprisonment not exceeding 18 months). 


Liability of Officers & Directors
Published: June 22, 2010

Paper Presented At Federation of Law Societies National Criminal Law Program St. John's Nfld., July, 2010, Section H.4.2
Author:Mark J. Sandler

Organizations, and most significantly corporations, act or omit to act through their officers, directors, agents and employees. Not surprisingly, jurisprudence exists on when such organizations bear criminal or regulatory liability under either the Criminal Code or other legislation (federal, provincial or territorial). (See Justice Wilson’s paper on Corporate Criminal Responsibility at section H.4.1)  


The Ken Murray Case: Defence Counsel's Dilemma
Published: October 16, 2009

Article Published by Canada Law Book in the Criminal Law Quarterly, Vol. 47, pg. 41
Author: Austin Cooper, Q.C.

About 45 years ago a man came into a lawyer’s office and retained him to defend him on a charge of capital murder. It was the middle of the night. The lawyer (who later became a judge) determined that there was indeed a warrant out for his client’s arrest for murder, and advised him that he must surrender to the police.


The Defence of Innocence 1990
Published: October 09, 2009

Article published in Edward L. Greenspan, Q.C. ed., Counsel for the Defence(Toronto: Irwin Law, 2005)
Author: Austin Cooper, Q.C.

Between January 11 and March 22, 1981, four infants who were patients in the cardiac ward at the Hospital for sick Children in Toronto died as a result of the deliberate administration of overdoses of a heart drug called Digoxin


Identification Evidence
Published: October 02, 2009

Paper Presented at Federation of Law Societies National Criminal Law Program Victoria, British Columbia, July, 2009 - SECTION 6.2

Author: Mark J. Sandler

It is well recognized that inaccurate eyewitness identification evidence is a systemic cause – perhaps the leading cause – of wrongful convictions. Eyewitnesses frequently “get it wrong.” This reflects not only the inherent difficulties in identifying people, particularly strangers, but how easily identifications can be tainted through flawed processes and become the product of suggestibility or contamination.


The Lawyer's Duty of Confidentiality
Published: July 31, 2009

Paper Presented at Federation of Law Societies National Criminal Law Program Edmonton, Alberta July, 2007 - SECTION 17.1
Author: Mark J. Sandler

It is beyond dispute that a lawyer has a duty of confidentiality to the client. However, the breadth of the duty, and exceptions to it, are more contentious. This paper briefly examines the parameters of this duty, most particularly in the context of criminal representation.

The duty of confidentiality finds expression not only in jurisprudence, but in ethical rules adopted by various law societies and by the Canadian Bar Association.


Should Experts Testify as Independant Sources of Information, Not as Witnessess on Behalf of the Party Who Calls Them?
Published: July 17, 2009

Paper Presented At Federation of Law Societies National Criminal Law Program Victoria, British Columbia, July, 2009
Author: Mark J. Sandler

Point-Counterpoint: Should Experts Testify As Independent Sources of Information, Not as Witnesses on Behalf of the Party Who Calls Them?

FOR THE AFFIRMATIVE: YES, THEY SHOULD

The recent Inquiry into Pediatric Forensic Pathology in Ontario (“the Inquiry”) was prompted by the serious deficiencies in the work done and opinions rendered by Dr. Charles Smith, a renowned pathologist affiliated both with the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto and with the Chief Coroner’s Office.