R. v. A.R.D.

(Calgary, P.C.).  ARD was charged with fraud under $5000. After a review of the disclosure, it was clear that there was a very meritorious defence that even if the Crown could prove that he/she was present at the business where the fraud was alleged to have occurred, it was very unlikely they could prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. In the tradition of the Crown directed a "stay of proceedings".  Though the Defence often never discovers the reasons for the "stay of proceedings" (stay) and did not learn of the reasons in this case, ARD illustrates that pressing to trial is often the best way to fully defend a charge. This accused will not have a criminal record reflecting this allegation. It is important to appreciate that a Crown directed "stay" results in the "stayed" charges being set aside.  The accused is no longer subject to bail conditions.  Neither the Court nor the Defence has any basis to interfere with a Prosecutor's discretion to "stay" a charge as opposed to applying for a "withdrawal".  A stay is effectively a "no guilty" result with the exception that if the Crown "stays", they have the discretion in exceptional circumstances, where new evidence that could not have been discovered by any ingenuity on the part of prosecution, to re-open the case within 12 months from the date of the stay. In my legal career as a Calgary criminal lawyer, I have only witnessed 1 case re-opened and that occurred because the accused effectively made admissible confessions to third-parties after the stay was entered.  For a free telephone consultation with an Alberta criminal lawyer who handles all criminal charges, including fraud, call 403.452.8018.