Charges dismissed against overdose prevention tent organizer

By Delon Shurtz on April 15, 2021.

LETHBRIDGE HERALDdshurtz@lethbridgeherald.com

A Lethbridge judge has dismissed the case against a Lethbridge man who was charged under a city bylaw for erecting a drug tent in a city park last year.
During a hearing last week in Lethbridge provincial court, Judge Kristin Ailsby dismissed 17 tickets against Timothy Michael Slaney. The charges allege Slaney erected a tent and held activities on city property without the required permits.
Lethbridge lawyer Miranda Hlady told Ailsby her firm and the City of Lethbridge agreed that Slaney’s matters would be adjourned March 5 until March 26. Hlady said she expected Lauren Chalaturnyk of Reynolds, Mirth, Richards and Farmer of Edmonton to attend either by video link or telephone. The law firm had been hired to represent the city on the bylaw tickets.
On March 26, however, Lethbridge lawyer Wade Hlady attended court on the tickets as Miranda’s agent, but no one from the city appeared. Wade informed the court that a request for dismissal was likely.
On April 9, Miranda appeared in court at 10 a.m. but stood down the matter until 1 p.m. to see if anyone from the prosecution showed up. At about 1:15 p.m. Ailsby dismissed the tickets for want of prosecution.
“We indicated on record that, to the best of our knowledge, there was never any communication from anyone at Reynolds, Mirth, Richards and Farmer,” Miranda told the Herald. “They certainly did not appear on March 26 or April 9.”
The charges were laid after the former supervised consumption site was shut down last year, and volunteers with the Lethbridge Overdose Prevention Society began erecting an unsanctioned overdose prevention pop-up tent in the downtown area.
Last November volunteer Kaley Ann Boudoin said the group began getting fines from city bylaw officers after it was denied a permit to operate in Galt Gardens. She said the tickets were issued for setting up the tent and for failing to remove it when directed.
Regulatory Services Manager Duane Ens said earlier this year that several other volunteers with the society were fined, as well, after they helped erect the tent on several occasions.
“Every time they put it up they got a charge,” Ens said.
The city issued a statement this week in response to the charges being dismissed, and said, “we were of the understanding that a constitutional challenge of the city bylaw was going to be undertaken but we were not aware of this ruling. Through our initial investigations it does not appear that notification was provided, and our outside legal counsel assures us had they been aware, they would have responded.
“Along with our counsel, we are currently investigating this matter and collecting further information surrounding the judge’s ruling.”
In a statement sent to the Lethbridge Courthouse on Wednesday, the Edmonton law firm said it believes the dismissal was done in error, and asked that the tickets and summons be re-issued to Slaney.
“Our office and the city were provided with no notice of the court date on April 9, 2021, and Ms. Hlady failed to inform our office that she would be seeking a dismissal of the tickets for want of prosecution,” the statement reads. “As such, we were provided with no notice of Ms. Hlady’s motion and were given no opportunity to respond. Further, no attempts were made by Ms. Hlady prior to or on April 9, 2021 to contact our office. Our office would clearly have attended on April 9, 2021 had we been provided with proper notice of the court date and Ms. Hlady’s intentions.”
The statement acknowledges that no one from the law office attended the court hearing March 26, but only because the city’s representative understood the matter was to be adjourned while Hlady was preparing a Constitutional challenge.
“We suggest it should have been obvious to all parties that the Crown’s non-appearance on March 26, 2021 was the result of mistake or error, and any subsequent dates should have been communicated to our office or to representatives at the City. Failure to do so was improper and should not have ultimately resulted in the tickets being dismissed.”
The statement further reads that the firm understood Hlady was filing a Constitutional challenge, which is why the tickets had been moved from traffic court to the provincial court criminal division, and that the firm’s attendance would not be required until Hlady had filed her notice.
“We understood that these matters would be adjourned until Ms. Hlady had filed her NCQ (Notice of Constitutional Question), which, as of April 9, 2021, still had not occurred. Further, we understood that matters were not proceeding in provincial court criminal docket as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, unless they were emergency, first appearance, or bail matters.
“However, regardless of our office’s understanding of what was to occur at the March 26, 2021 court date, the subsequent April 9, 2021 date was never communicated to our office and Ms. Hlady provided no notice of her intended motion. We suggest it was a procedural error to have the tickets dismissed without any prior notice to our office and without any attempt on the part of Ms. Hlady to contact our office to determine why Crown counsel was not present.
“On this basis, we would ask that the Court remedy what was a clear procedural error by re-issuing Mr. Slaney’s tickets with new summons, so that this matter can be properly considered.

Follow @@DShurtzHerald on Twitter

4
-3

Comments are closed.