In R. v. Blaney, 2022 BCCA 98, March 16, 2022, the accused was charged with two counts of breaching a long-term supervision order, contrary to section 753.3(1) of the Criminal Code. The order contained the following condition:
Take prescribed medication as directed by a health care practitioner and while required to live at a CRF (Chilliwack Community Correctional Centre), all medications must be handed to the CRF and dispensed in accordance with the prescribed dosage as outlined on the medication package.
An issue arose as to what was the mens rea element for the offence of breach of a long-term supervision order. The British Columbia Court of Appeal concluded that
A “subjective mens rea” was required, as set out in R. v. Zora, 2020 SCC 14 (at paragraphs 44 and 45):
Although there is no appellate authority dealing with the mens rea requirement for s. 753.3(1), and Zora concerned s. 145(3) of the Criminal Code which has a slightly different statutory construction, I agree with the parties that the requirements set out in Zora are applicable to this failure to comply offence. In that regard, I note that in R. v. Docherty,  2 S.C.R. 941, the Court held that proof of subjective mens rea was required for a breach of probation offence (now s. 733.1). The statutory construction for the two offences (s. 753.3(1) and s. 733.1) is similar; both state that an offender “who, without reasonable excuse, fails or refuses to comply” with an LTSO or probation order is guilty of the offence.
Adapting the requirements from Zora to the circumstances here, in order to satisfy the mens rea requirement for the Medication Condition, the Crown had to establish that Mr. Blaney:
·knew of the Medication Condition and that it required him to turn in his prescription medications to the CCC staff; and
·knowingly failed to act (or recklessly failed to act) according to that condition knowing that he had the Gabapentin, a prescription medication, in his possession after he returned to the CCC on September 8, 2017.