A Rush to Justice: The Institution of Presumptive Ceilings in R v Jordan and Their Potential Implications for Wrongful Convictions.

In 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada ("SCC") released its landmark decision in the case of R v Jordan. With the objective of addressing widespread delay within the Canadian justice system, the implications of the ruling were such that the Court set out definitive limits on the length of time in which accused persons must be brought to trial before a stay of proceedings is presumed to be entered. Since the decision, many scholars have emphasized the importance of resolving delay within the justice system to ensure that widespread stays of proceedings are not being entered, whereby the justice system may consequently fall into a state of disrepute. However, an equally important consideration that has not yet been explored concerns the risks that a failure to adequately remedy delay may result in police and Crown rushing to resolve cases within these strict time constraints. To explore this gap within the literature, this paper utilizes wrongful conviction concepts and available data to demonstrate that the current state of delay within the justice system has the potential to contribute to a "rush to justice" mentality among police and Crown. The development of such a mentality is problematic as it has the potential to lead to a wrongful conviction. Considering this elevated risk for wrongful convictions, this paper thus provides a new perspective in underscoring the importance of resolving delays within the justice system in the advent of Jordan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]