Sentences with phrase «representative jury rolls»

A more critical finding by the majority of the Supreme Court in Kokopenace would encourage further action by the province to ensure representative jury rolls in criminal and civil court cases as well.

«If we had more representative jury rolls, if there were far more indigenous people on the rolls, then you have a limited number of peremptory challenges, you wouldn't be able to use them to sway the jury in that way,» she says.

As pointed out by the dissenting judges in Kokopenace, the majority's decision conflated a representative jury roll with a representative jury.

Both the majority and the dissenting decision in Kokopenace placed an obligation on the province to take steps to ensure a representative jury roll.

The majority of the Supreme Court found that Ontario made reasonable efforts to ensure that Aboriginal people on reserve were included in the jury roll, even though the province's efforts to increase Aboriginal participation and assemble a representative jury roll were unsuccessful.

Not exact matches

Two dissenting judges, Justice Cromwell and Chief Justice McLachlin, found that the province was required to take steps to ensure that jury rolls are representative, and did not meet its obligations in that regard.

The decision of the Supreme Court in Kokopenace was divided, with four of the seven judges finding that despite the underinclusion of individuals living on reserves in the District of Kenora on jury rolls, Mr. Kokopenace's right to a fair, impartial and representative jury under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was not violated.

The drastic underrepresentation of on - reserve Aboriginal people on the jury roll in Kokopenace meant that Mr. Kokopenace's right to a fair trial was not met; the petit jury would not be selected from a representative roll.

Failing to ensure that the jury roll is representative of a community may undermine the representativeness of the process.

In the dissenting decision, they stated that representativeness should focus on whether the jury roll is as representative of the community as would be a group of individuals selected randomly from that community.

Criminal Law: Jury Representation R. v. Kokopenace, 2015 SCC 28 (35475) Representativeness focuses on the process used to compile the jury roll, not its ultimate composition, and the state satisfies the right to a representative jury by providing a fair opportunity to participate in the jury process; and that happens where the state makes reasonable efforts to: (1) compile the roll using random selection from lists drawing from a broad cross-section (2) deliver jury notices to those who have been randomly selecJury Representation R. v. Kokopenace, 2015 SCC 28 (35475) Representativeness focuses on the process used to compile the jury roll, not its ultimate composition, and the state satisfies the right to a representative jury by providing a fair opportunity to participate in the jury process; and that happens where the state makes reasonable efforts to: (1) compile the roll using random selection from lists drawing from a broad cross-section (2) deliver jury notices to those who have been randomly selecjury roll, not its ultimate composition, and the state satisfies the right to a representative jury by providing a fair opportunity to participate in the jury process; and that happens where the state makes reasonable efforts to: (1) compile the roll using random selection from lists drawing from a broad cross-section (2) deliver jury notices to those who have been randomly selecjury by providing a fair opportunity to participate in the jury process; and that happens where the state makes reasonable efforts to: (1) compile the roll using random selection from lists drawing from a broad cross-section (2) deliver jury notices to those who have been randomly selecjury process; and that happens where the state makes reasonable efforts to: (1) compile the roll using random selection from lists drawing from a broad cross-section (2) deliver jury notices to those who have been randomly selecjury notices to those who have been randomly selected.

A majority of the Ontario Court of Appeal ordered a new trial, finding that Mr. Kokopenace's rights under sections 11 (d) and 11 (f) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms had been violated because the jury roll from which his jury was selected was not sufficiently representative.