R. v. Islam, 2017 ONCJ 335 is a useful case for POA prosecutions.
Some take aways include:
S11(b) Jordan analysis applies to POA matters.
Time runs on Part 1 POA prosecutions from date of charge and not date defendant took some step - that seems obvious but was argued.
Cases are not argued well and the parties should prepare properly and be concise -
"43. The court also ventures to state that part of the issue with regard to delay in this case rests with the conduct of this case by the respondent and the often irreverent response and caustic and adversarial behavior of the applicant, who would like to avail himself of his status as a law student and his knowledge of the law, while at the same time relying on the fact that he is a self-represented defendant who is not familiar with trial procedure. This case should never have taken the time it has taken to get to today's date. While the defendant's status has not fared in the court's analysis of the facts, neither side has applied a systematic analysis of Jordan nor followed the test set out in Jordan. Rather both sides have demonstrated a lack of knowledge of this case and have not pro-offered relevant case law or any case law for that matter, as was the situation with regard to the respondent. It is not enough for the applicant to submit cases to the court without showing the court how these cases apply to our given fact situation. It is incumbent upon anyone making an application before any court, to make the argument as to why the court should grant the application or relief that is being sought and make it in a relevant and succinct manner."