Manitoba Court Closures (Coronavirus / COVID 19 Response) - Fall 2020

On November 10, 2020, after the Province of Manitoba announced a province-wide red alert to deal with the increase in our COVID-19 rate, the Courts in Manitoba responded by shutting down most hearings for the next month. The initial announcement from the Provincial Court was on November 12, 2020. As the Province of Manitoba provided further updates about COVID-19 measures, the courts have extended the shutdown with a second announcement on November 30, 2020. Again on December 30, 2020, the courts extended the shutdown with a third announcement and are keeping courts closed until January 29, 2021.

Because most of the criminal cases are handled by the Provincial Court, I am going to focus on what you need to know to confirm when your next court date will be.

I will also endeavour to update this post as I receive updated information from the courts, so you can come back here. This post was last updated on January 6, 2021 at 4:47 pm.

---

The shutdown was supposed to end on Dec. 11, but was extended to Jan. 29, 2021

---

Provincial Court

On November 10, 2020, the Provincial Court of Manitoba sent out a notice that all courts would be cancelled except for major court centres (Winnipeg, Portage la Prairie, Brandon, Dauphin, The Pas, and Thompson) to handle in custody cases for both adults and youths. You can read the official notice by clicking here. If you are NOT in custody right now, you will NOT have a court appearance between November 12, 2020 and January 29, 2021. This means that first appearances, remand appearances, guilty plea dates, sentencing dates, and trial dates for people who are NOT in custody are all being cancelled and will have to be rescheduled.

What is my new court date?

If you do not have a lawyer but would like some help with your case, please click here to contact me and I would be happy to help you with your case. I am happy to arrange meetings by phone, video conference, or in person (on a case by case basis). We can also complete Legal Aid applications over the phone.

If you were recently arrested and released by the police with a court date between now and January 29, 2021, you can find out when your “new” first court appearance will be clicking on one of the links below.

• Winnipeg

  • Court date was between November 16 and December 11

  • Court date was between December 14 and December 31

  • Court date was between January 4 and January 8

  • Court date was between January 11 and January 29

• Winnipeg Legal Aid Administrative Court

  • Court date was December 8 at 9:30 am in courtroom 402

• Brandon, Thompson, The Pas, Dauphin, or Portage la Prairie

  • Court date was between November 16 and December 11

  • Court date was between December 14 and December 31

  • Court date was between January 4 and January 8

  • Court date was between January 11 and January 29

• All other rural court appearances

  • Court date was between November 16 and December 11

  • Court date was between December 14 and December 31

  • Court date was between January 4 and January 8

  • Court date was between January 11 and January 29

  • List of court locations that will not open court in the foreseeable future

You can always call the Provincial Court to confirm what your next court date will be at 204-945-3454, ext. 1 for English and then ext. 0 for reception.

If you have a lawyer already

If you have a lawyer, you can contact him or her to find out when your new court date will be. Please keep in mind, if you had a guilty plea date, sentencing date, or trial date arranged between November 12 and January 29, your lawyer will have to coordinate a new date with both the court office and the assigned Crown Attorney and that will take some time to organize. So please, be patient as we reschedule and finalize new dates. (If you are already a client of Rees Dyck Rogala, you can contact Kyra at Front Reception at our firm to confirm your next court date 204-415-5544 ext. 0).

Provincial Court - Northern Communities

On October 30, 2020, the Provincial Court of Manitoba sent out a notice that some court locations would not see court resuming until at least January 2021 (Brochet First Nations, Cross Lake, and Norway House). A list of other court locations did not expect to hold court for the foreseeable future (Gillam, God’s Lake Narrows, God’s River, Lac Brochet, Oxford House, Peguis, Poplar River, Pukatawgan, Shamattawa, South Indian Lake, Split Lake, and Waywayseecappo). There was a plan to return to several communities in November (Garden Hill, Churchill, St. Martin, and Sioux Valley). You can read the official notice by clicking here. However, after the announcement on November 30, 2020, all rural court dates are cancelled until at least January 8th.

Traffic Court at 373 Broadway

The Provincial Offences Court office at 373 Broadway will be closed to the public between November 12, 2020 and January 29, 2021. Any court appearances between those dates will have to be rescheduled. Click here to see the official court notice about traffic tickets. The court notice says that the new date and time will be sent to you, but you can also follow up with them directly by phone 204-945-3156 or 1-800-282-8069 ext 3156 or by email to poc@gov.mb.ca.

Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench

On November 10, 2020, the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench announced that all matters scheduled to appear between November 16 to December 11 were cancelled, except for judge-alone criminal trials with an accused in custody. All jury trials that were going to start during this time will be rescheduled, but trials already in progress are allowed to finish. You can read the official notice by clicking here. The Court is prepared to allow virtual trials to proceed with permission from the Associate Chief Justice on a case-by-case basis. Many other judicial services that were being offered by video or audio conference are going to continue (including criminal, civil, family, and child protection matters).

Manitoba Court of Appeal

On November 2, 2020, the Manitoba Court of Appeal announced that all hearings would be conducted remotely (by telephone or video appearances) until further notice. You can read the official notice by clicking here. There were no updates or changes to this policy after the provincial announcement.

---

---

About the author

Michael Dyck is a partner at Rees Dyck Rogala Law Offices. He represents clients primarily from Winnipeg, Steinbach, and rural Manitoba. He has extensive experience helping people charged with criminal offences and focuses on building legal strategy with clients. To read more of his articles, please visit his partner's website TomRees.ca.

Manitoba Court Closures (Coronavirus / COVID 19 Response)

This post was last updated on May 21, 2020 at 11:03 am.

Please click here to visit my updated COVID-19 court post.

Due to concerns about the spread of Coronavirus (COVID-19), all three levels of court in Manitoba announced on March 16, 2020 action to essentially shut down all courts across the province.

Because most of the criminal cases are handled by the Provincial Court, I am going to focus on what you need to know to confirm when your next court date will be. If you are NOT in custody right now, you will NOT have a court appearance between now and May 29, 2020. This means that first appearances, remand appearances, guilty plea dates, sentencing dates, and trial dates for people who are not in custody are all being cancelled and will have to be rescheduled.

---

Major Update

The Provincial Court is extending the shutdown now from May 1 to May 29, 2020 for out of custody cases

You can read the full announcement by clicking here

---

If you have a lawyer already

If you have a lawyer, you can contact him or her to find out when your new court date will be. Please keep in mind, if you had a guilty plea date, sentencing date, or trial date arranged between March 17 and May 29, your lawyer will have to coordinate a new date with both the court office and the assigned Crown Attorney and that will take some time to organize. So please, be patient as we reschedule and finalize new dates. Keep in mind, nothing is happening before May 29th, so there is no need to panic and fill up our voicemails right now.

Major Update (March 26, 2020 at 7:01 pm): All clients who had a guilty plea, sentencing, or trial date set during the shutdown will NOT be able to even reschedule a new date until after May 1st.

If you have a first appearance before May 29

If you were recently arrested and released by the police with a court date in Winnipeg or rural Manitoba between now and May 29, 2020, please check the list below to see when your first court appearance will probably proceed. If you are feeling overwhelmed with all of this (and you don’t have a lawyer on your case already), please click here to contact me to set up a time to talk and I can help you with your first court date and your case.

If you want to be sure

You can always call the Provincial Court to confirm what your next court date will be by calling 204-945-3454, ext. 1 for English and then ext. 0 for reception. Once again, this announcement was only made on March 16th, so I would say wait at least a week or two so the court staff can be able to confirm when rescheduled court appearances will be held.

---

Provincial Court - Official Replacement Dates

• Click here to download the official replacement dates for March 17-20, 2020

• Click here to download the official replacement dates for March 23-27, 2020

• Click here to download the official replacement dates for March 30-April 3, 2020

• Click here to download the official replacement dates for April 6-9, 2020

• Click here to download the official replacement dates for April 14-17, 2020

• Click here to download the official replacement dates for April 20-24, 2020

• Click here to download the official replacement dates for April 27-May 1, 2020

• Click here to download the official replacement dates for May 4-8, 2020

• Click here to download the official replacement dates for May 11-15, 2020

---

Traffic Tickets at 373 Broadway

All Provincial Offence Notices (like charges under the Highway Traffic Act) will be rescheduled and the Manitoba government said that people will be notified about the new dates. All NEW tickets will be automatically put over for 60 days from when the ticket is filed with the court, so the deadlines to pay will also be pushed back.

If you want to fight a ticket, you can call 204-945-3156 or 1-800-282-8069 extension 3156 to speak to a court representative about options. It may be faster to email POC@gov.mb.ca instead. If you just wanted to make a payment, you can do that either online, by mail, or by dropping off your payment in the secure drop box located in front of 373 Broadway. Click here for more information about making a payment.

On May 21, 2020, the Provincial Court released an update about tickets (provincial offence notices) appearing at 373 Broadway. The main office at 373 Broadway will be closed until July 6, 2020. However, they will be setting up teleconference calls for people wanting to plead guilty and seek a reduction in the fine as well as to set a trial date. For all the details, please click here to view the official notice.

---

Provincial Court - Winnipeg Sittings (Not in Custody)

Adult

• Normally every Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday at 1:00 pm in rooms 301 and 302

• Announcement from March 18, 2020 says that any matters appearing while the court is shut down will automatically be remanded 8 weeks (for example, court appearances on March 17 went to May 12 automatically) and the court’s website will be updated with the correct remand dates

Adult regular drug charges

• Normally every 1st and 3rd Thursday afternoon at 1:00 pm in 301

Adult summary conviction or special drug charges

• Normally every Monday at 1:00 pm in room 303

Adult diversion cases

• Normally every 1st and 3rd Friday afternoon at 1pm in 301

Youth

• Normally Tuesday mornings at 9:00 am in room 302

Drug Treatment Court

• Normally Tuesday afternoons at 1:00 pm in room 303

Mental Health Court

• Normally Thursday afternoons at 1:00 pm in room 303

---

Provincial Court - Rural Sittings

Altona - June 22, 2020 (regular docket)

Arborg - June 1, 2020 (regular docket)

Ashern - June 10, 2020 (regular docket)

Beausejour - June 1, 2020 (Lac du Bonnet docket) & June 2, 2020 (regular docket) & June 16, 2020 (child protection docket)

Berens River - June 9, 2020 (regular docket)

Bloodvein - June 10, 2020 (regular docket)

Cross Lake - TBD

Emerson - June 11, 2020 (regular docket) & June 17, 2020 (child protection docket)

Garden Hill - June 24, 2020 (regular docket) & June 25, 2020 (child protection docket)

Gimli - June 15, 2020 (regular docket) & June 16, 2020 (trial docket)

Little Grand Rapids - July 8, 2020 (regular docket)

Lundar - June 18, 2020 (regular docket)

Morden - June 2, 2020 (trial docket) & June 9, 2020 (regular docket)

Norway House - TBD

Pauingassi - July 23, 2020 (regular docket)

Peguis - June 1, 2020 (child protection and trial docket) & June 2, 2020 (regular docket) & June 17, 2020 (trial docket)

Pine Falls - June 2, 2020 (child protection and youth docket) & June 3, 2020 (regular docket) & June 4, 2020 (trial docket)

Poplar River - June 1, 2020 (regular docket)

Selkirk - June 2, 2020 (trial docket) & June 5, 2020 (regular docket) & June 29, 2020 (federal/drug docket)

St. Boniface - June 12, 2020 (regular docket)

St. Martin - June 17, 2020 (regular docket) & June 18, 2020 (child protection and trial docket)

St. Pierre - June 22 & 23, 2020 (regular docket)

St. Theresa Point - June 10 & 11, 2020 (regular docket)

Steinbach - June 4 (regular docket) & June 5, 2020 (trial docket) & June 12, 2020 (child protection docket)

Stonewall - June 15, 2020 (regular docket) & June 22, 2020 (trial docket)

*If your rural court appearance is not listed, it is because I have not been able to determine what the next court sitting will be. Please contact the court office directly to confirm when your appearance will be.

---

You can check out the news stories about this from CTV Winnipeg “Court sittings cancelled due to COVID-19 concerns,” the Winnipeg Sun “COVID-19: Extraordinary times, extraordinary measures for MB justice system,” and the Winnipeg Free Press “Manitoba courts take 'unprecedented step' in coronavirus efforts.”

The Manitoba Court of Appeal made the following announcement (click here to download the full notice):

Effective and including Friday March 20, 2020, the Manitoba Court of Appeal will suspend all appeal and chamber matters up to and including Friday April 17, 2020, at which time the COVID-19 situation will be reassessed. The only exceptions will be urgent matters and matters where all parties consent to having their appeal or chamber matter heard based only on written materials filed with the court. Urgent matters will be heard by teleconference or again, where all parties consent to a paper hearing, based only on written filings.

The Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench made the following announcement (click here to download the full notice):

During the period from March 17 to April 17, 2020, the Court of Queen’s Bench is limiting scheduled matters to either emergency or urgent matters as they will be identified below based on the distinctive work of the Court’s General and Family Divisions. The application of this direction to the period following April 17, 2020 is subject to evolving information concerning the virus. Criminal Matters - Trials, voir dires, and criminal motions. All non-custody matters will be adjourned to a special assignment list presently scheduled for April 16, 2020, at 9:30 a.m. That date is subject to change. All presently scheduled in-custody matters must be the subject of a special pre-trial conference before a designated judge. The judge will receive submissions so as to determine whether the trial will proceed or not. Bails and Bail Reviews - This court will continue to function. All other criminal matters, including estreatals, summary conviction appeals, pre-trial conferences, and case management conferences, are adjourned sine die.

The Manitoba Provincial Court made the following announcement (click here to download the full notice):

Effective immediately, all circuit courts sittings throughout Manitoba are cancelled until and including May 1, 2020 or until further notice. All circuit court matters will be adjourned to the first scheduled sitting of that circuit following May 1, 2020. For all adult and youth in custody circuit matters counsel are encouraged to schedule teleconference case management meetings to discuss alternative options for hearings. In addition to all circuit locations being cancelled, all adult and youth out of custody appearances in Winnipeg, Portage la Prairie, Brandon, Dauphin, The Pas, Thompson, Selkirk, Steinbach, Swan River, Minnedosa, Morden, Flin Flon and Virden including first appearances and trials between March 17, 2020 and May 1, 2020 are cancelled. Those having an appearance between these dates are encouraged to contact their lawyer, check the Manitoba Courts website or contact the court centre for specific appearance dates. Efforts will be made throughout the province to increase the number of telephone points of contact for the public to access information. The Provincial Court of Manitoba remains open to deal with in custody matters in all court centres (Winnipeg, Portage la Prairie, Brandon, Dauphin, The Pas and Thompson), and is available to hear applications with respect to other urgent matters. Adult and youth in custody bail and disposition courts will continue to sit, with accused persons appearing by video if available. Efforts will be made to facilitate counsel appearing by telephone when requested.

---

About the author

Michael Dyck is a partner at Rees Dyck Rogala Law Offices. He represents clients primarily from Winnipeg, Steinbach, and rural Manitoba. He has extensive experience helping people charged with criminal offences and focuses on building legal strategy with clients. To read more of his articles, please visit his partner's website TomRees.ca.

Supreme Court of Canada Series: R. v. Jordan (Unreasonable Delay)

On July 8, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada Released its decision R. v. Jordan, 2016 SCC 27. It was a close decision with a 5-4 majority written by Justices Moldaver, Karakatsanis and Brown.

The issue in the case was whether or not there was too much delay in the criminal proceedings against the accused. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms gives everyone the right to be tried within a reasonable time under section 11(b). This is a critical right in a fair justice system to prevent the government from intentionally dragging a case along while an accused is detained in custody. For Mr. Jordan, his case took 49.5 months (just over 4 years) to finish from the time when he was charged. The lower courts determined the delay was not unreasonable and denied Mr. Jordan's earlier applications for unreasonable delay.

Part of the problem with unreasonable delay is that the only remedy or the only way to fix/address it is by a judge entering a stay of proceedings. In other words, the judge decides to drop the charges. The judge cannot decide to, instead, reduce a sentence for unreasonable delay. That would be an improper and illegal remedy. In other situations, where your right to counsel or your right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure are violated, the judge must decide what evidence, if any, ought to be excluded from a trial. Even if evidence is obtained illegally, the judge may determine to still allow the evidence in. There is another Supreme Court of Canada case that deals with that issue called R. v. Grant, 2009 SCC 32. So, judges may feel that the burden for unreasonable delay should be very high because there is only one remedy and it is a significant one.

The Supreme Court of Canada concluded that courts have become complacent with delay, which may render the right to be free from unreasonable delay toothless. In the introduction at paragraph 4, the Court wrote:

Our system, however, has come to tolerate excessive delays. The circumstances in this appeal are illustrative. Notwithstanding a delay of over four years in bringing a drug case of modest complexity to trial, both the trial judge and the Court of Appeal were of the view that the appellant was tried within a reasonable time. Their analyses are reflective of doctrinal and practical difficulties plaguing the current analytical framework governing s. 11 (b). These difficulties have fostered a culture of complacency within the system towards delay.

The Supreme Court had problems with the previously existing approach and framework laid out in R. v. Morin, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771. The Court outlined the framework from R. v. Morin at paragraph 30 and commented it was too unpredictable, too confusing, and too complex.

The Morin framework requires courts to balance four factors in determining whether a breach of s. 11 (b) has occurred: (1) the length of the delay; (2) defence waiver; (3) the reasons for the delay, including the inherent needs of the case, defence delay, Crown delay, institutional delay, and other reasons for delay; and (4) prejudice to the accused’s interests in liberty, security of the person, and a fair trial. Prejudice can be either actual or inferred from the length of the delay. 

The Court introduced the new and governing approach at paragraph 46-47:

[46] At the heart of the new framework is a ceiling beyond which delay is presumptively unreasonable. The presumptive ceiling is set at 18 months for cases going to trial in the provincial court, and at 30 months for cases going to trial in the superior court (or cases going to trial in the provincial court after a preliminary inquiry). [47] If the total delay from the charge to the actual or anticipated end of trial (minus defence delay) exceeds the ceiling, then the delay is presumptively unreasonable. To rebut this presumption, the Crown must establish the presence of exceptional circumstances. If it cannot, the delay is unreasonable and a stay will follow.

However, any delays that are caused by the defence are subtracted from the delay period. It only makes sense that the defence does not work to intentionally delay the matter and then argue there has been excessive delay. At the same time, circumstances that lie outside the control of the Crown Attorney can also be subtracted from the delay period. If the total delay is below these ceilings, defence can still make an application for excessive delay if they meet two criteria:

1. it took meaningful steps that demonstrate a sustained effort to expedite the proceedings; and
2. the case took markedly longer than it reasonably should have. 

So, we have a new framework for looking at institutional and systemic delay in the criminal justice system in Canada. In Manitoba, there was a recent decision (that was before R. v. Jordan) that dealt with this exact issue of unreasonable delay. In R. v. Vandermeulen (M), 2015 MBCA 84, the Manitoba Court of Appeal heard a motion for delay after the accused was convicted after a trial. The Court agreed the delay was excessive and entered a stay of proceedings. Manitoba Justice appealed the decision but leave to the Supreme Court of Canada was denied.

Related articles

• Supreme Court of Canada Series: R. v. Safarzadeh-Markhali (Pre-Sentence Custody Credit) (MichaelDyck.ca)
• Supreme Court of Canada Series: R. v. St-Cloud (Tertiary Ground for Bail) (MichaelDyck.ca)
• Supreme Court of Canada Series: R. v. Nur (Mandatory Minimums for Firearms) (Michael Dyck.ca)

About the author

Michael Dyck is a partner at Rees & Dyck Criminal Defence. He represents clients primarily from Winnipeg, Steinbach, and rural Manitoba. He has extensive experience helping people charged with criminal offences and focuses on building legal strategy with clients. To read more of his articles, please visit his partner's website TomRees.ca.

Supreme Court of Canada Series: R. v. Safarzadeh-Markhali (Pre-Sentence Custody Credit)

On April 15, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada released a decision on credit that judges can give when a person has spent time in custody before he/she has plead guilty in R. v. Safarzadeh-Markhali, 2016 SCC 14. Most people would agree that if you spend time in jail before you plead guilty, that the time spent could be used towards a sentence when you plead guilty. In most cases, sentencing judges do give credit for time already served or time in custody, commonly called "TIC" by defence lawyers. However, the Criminal Code does not requires judges to give credit for time served:

Section 719(1):  A sentence commences when it is imposed, except where a relevant enactment otherwise provides.

Where this issue becomes controversial is what amount of credit should a person get for the time in custody. A day for a day? Double credit? A day and a half for a day? A few years ago, it was fairly common for judges to give people double credit for the time spent in custody. That changed when the government enacted the Truth in Sentencing Act in 2009. The new law limited the amount of credit a judge could give a person for time served to a day for a day but enhanced credit of a day and a half for a day could be given "if the circumstances justify it."

The Truth in Sentencing Act has been challenged at the Supreme Court before. In 2014, it released its decision in R. v. Summers, 2014 SCC 26 which held that losing out on earned remission or parole was a circumstance that could justify enhanced credit. The logic is that once a sentence is imposed, prisoners are entitled to earned remission in provincial jail (early release for good behaviour) and parole in federal prisons (reintegration to the community).

For example, Aaron and Brock are both charged with theft under $5,000, both are detained in custody, and both want to plead guilty. Aaron pleads guilty at his first appearance in bail court and receives a sentence of 30 days custody. As long as he of good behaviour in custody, he would be released after he serves two thirds of his sentence, or 20 days. Brock's defence lawyer arranges the earliest sentencing date he can, but they can only book a time 30 days later. At that point, Brock is sentenced to 30 days of time served. On paper, both Aaron and Brock's sentences indicate 30 days of custody, but Aaron only spent 20 days in jail whereas Brock spent 30. Enhanced credit of a day and a half for a day is designed to level the playing field to take into account that while you are waiting to be sentenced in custody you are not eligible for earned remission or parole.

The Truth in Sentencing Act also prevented some individuals from EVER getting enhanced credit. If you were on a previous form of release for another charge or if a judge denied you bail primarily because of your criminal record, you were then disentitled to receive enhanced credit. Once again, this part of the act created unfairness. If you were charged with robbery and released on bail and then re-arrested for a second robbery, you were disentitled to enhanced credit, even if the second robbery charge was dropped because you were not actually involved at all.

Very recently, the Manitoba Court of Appeal heard two cases together from Manitoba about these two scenarios where a person could be denied enhanced credit in R. v. Kovich (GW), 2016 MBCA 19. You can check out the previous decisions in these cases as well: 

• R. v. Kovich, 2013 MBPC 68
• R. v. Kovich, 2014 MBPC 15
• Her Majesty the Queen v. Courtney Nadine Bittern, 2014 MBPC 51

The court decided that this section of the Truth in Sentencing Act is unconstitutional and deleted those portions from the law at paragraph 162:

Viewed in that manner, I have concluded that the two exemptions constitute an unjustifiable infringement of section 7 of the Charter for two reasons.  First, the exemptions subject identically-placed offenders to different periods of imprisonment (depending on whether they are able to obtain bail) for reasons that are not relevant to the determination of a proportionate sentence, thereby interfering with the principle of proportionality in the sentencing process, which is a principle of fundamental justice.  Second, the exemptions go too far in that they overreach in their effect; they target those who commit crimes while out on bail or violent offenders but in reality, they capture offenders who are unable to get bail because of socio-economic reasons, not because of their conduct.

However, the Manitoba Court of Appeal only has jurisdiction over this province. The Supreme Court has jurisdiction over the entire country and it decided in R. v. Safarzadeh-Markhali that one of these exceptions was unconstitutional - individuals who are denied bail because of their record. This case is also important because it is just another example of how the Stephen Harper Conservative Government created laws that the Supreme Court later determined to be unconstitutional. The rest of the Canada will have to wait to see if either Parliament changes the law or if another case makes it to the Supreme Court of Canada that deals with the second reason to deny enhanced credit though.

Related articles

• Supreme Court of Canada Series: R. v. St-Cloud (Tertiary Ground for Bail) (MichaelDyck.ca)
• Supreme Court of Canada Series: R. v. Nur (Mandatory Minimums for Firearms) (Michael Dyck.ca)

About the author

Michael Dyck is a partner at Rees & Dyck Criminal Defence. He represents clients primarily from Winnipeg, Steinbach, and rural Manitoba. He has extensive experience helping people charged with criminal offences and focuses on building legal strategy with clients. To read more of his articles, please visit his partner's website TomRees.ca.