Ontario criminal | Preliminary Inquiry
DISCHARGE OF ACCUSED
Dismissal of charges against nurse and doctor quashed on application for certiorari
Application by Crown for certiorari to quash decision of preliminary inquiry judge. Judge dismissed five charges against accused and committed them to trial on five other offences. Female accused was registered nurse and male accused who was her husband, was doctor licensed to practice medicine in Ontario. Together, accused operated medical clinic. Police alleged that accused held “clinics” in various provinces and for cash payment of $250 patients received documentation signed by male accused that entitled them to apply to Health Canada to receive licence to possess and grow marijuana. People were also seen in clinic for sole purpose of having their documents signed by male accused. These individuals were charged $100 and, in addition, OHIP was billed. To qualify for licence person had to have specified condition and must have seen specialist for this condition, and specialist must have tried other treatments and that such treatments failed. Specialist had to agree that marijuana should be used. None of specialists referred to in documentation recommended use of marijuana. Five charges were dismissed because documents were not considered to be forged documents as defined in s. 366 of Criminal Code. Application allowed. Judge did not assess whole of evidence against correct elements of offence of forgery and he committed jurisdictional error. Had he considered elements argued by Crown he may have reached different conclusion. Dismissal of five charges was quashed and matter was remitted to judge to consider law and all of evidence.
R. v. Kamermans (Jun. 26, 2015, Ont. S.C.J., J.M. Johnston J., File No. CR 14-0046-00) 122 W.C.B. (2d) 367.
Dismissal of charges against nurse and doctor quashed on application for certiorari
Application by Crown for certiorari to quash decision of preliminary inquiry judge. Judge dismissed five charges against accused and committed them to trial on five other offences. Female accused was registered nurse and male accused who was her husband, was doctor licensed to practice medicine in Ontario. Together, accused operated medical clinic. Police alleged that accused held “clinics” in various provinces and for cash payment of $250 patients received documentation signed by male accused that entitled them to apply to Health Canada to receive licence to possess and grow marijuana. People were also seen in clinic for sole purpose of having their documents signed by male accused. These individuals were charged $100 and, in addition, OHIP was billed. To qualify for licence person had to have specified condition and must have seen specialist for this condition, and specialist must have tried other treatments and that such treatments failed. Specialist had to agree that marijuana should be used. None of specialists referred to in documentation recommended use of marijuana. Five charges were dismissed because documents were not considered to be forged documents as defined in s. 366 of Criminal Code. Application allowed. Judge did not assess whole of evidence against correct elements of offence of forgery and he committed jurisdictional error. Had he considered elements argued by Crown he may have reached different conclusion. Dismissal of five charges was quashed and matter was remitted to judge to consider law and all of evidence.
R. v. Kamermans (Jun. 26, 2015, Ont. S.C.J., J.M. Johnston J., File No. CR 14-0046-00) 122 W.C.B. (2d) 367.
