File 11b motion in advance

[OpenGambit]

I glanced at Velone, its a busy day.

But I thought it said that you CAN get an 11b without the notice of consitutional question, or did I skim it badly?
And why would it not be a precedent?

[iFly55]

yes you are correct

the reason it is not precedent was because it was not ruled by a superior court of justice, therefore that decision was not binding. i've also read that the crown has appealed that decision, so it could "soon" be repealed or become precedent (not sure)

[OpenGambit]

my point is that Vellone doesn't deal with disclosure, nor does it say you can't request a stay without a notice of constitutional question. that is the opposite of what you said in your post...

Secondly, the point about precedental value is that the first case you quoted has the same precedental value as the 2nd case that you posted. but yet you use one to establish "magic" number, while treating the 2nd one differently. That is completely inconsistant. Either they are both good or neither of them are.

[iFly55]

my point is that Vellone doesn't deal with disclosure

well indirectly it does... what is the consequence the crown absorbs when failing to give a defendant their disclosure in a timely manner? because one-day it might infringe on their 11b

JP/crown will simply adjourn the trial to a new date, just like what happened with the OP; i've yet to read about a JP staying/dismissing a trial due solely to lack of disclosure, it's always the crown's decision not the JP ... because again it would one-day infringe on the defendant's 11b

nor does it say you can't request a stay without a notice of constitutional question. that is the opposite of what you said in your post...

yes but that case is not precedent

Secondly, the point about precedental value is that the first case you quoted has the same precedental value as the 2nd case that you posted. but yet you use one to establish "magic" number, while treating the 2nd one differently. That is completely inconsistant. Either they are both good or neither of them are.

i can attest that when i submitted my 11b app in Dec 2011, that the sitting JP and attending crown accepted R v. Andrade

i also know many people who were forced straight to trial when bringing R v. Vellone, because the sitting JP dismissed it as it was not binding to their courts (traffic)

i'm confused as to how you deduced both cases have the same precedental value; the first case was ruled by a superior court, whereas the second was not

[OpenGambit]

nothing change the fact that the Vellone, the case you cited, says the exact opposite of your post.

And as far as I can tell, they are both cited ONCJ, and are argued in front of Justices...

in any event, you are far to caught up on the idea of stare decisis. Its really not a rule as much as a guideline.