R. v. Burrell

R. v. Burrell

The court found on the balance of probabilities that the officers did not have reasonable grounds to effect a lawful arrest for break and enter and the accused was not shown to have been arrested for possession prior to the search; consequently the subsequent warrantless search of the vehicle was not authorized as incident to a lawful arrest (s.8 breach). Applying the Grant factors the court concluded admission of the evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute and therefore excluded the drug evidence under s.24(2), resulting in an acquittal.

Citation
2018 NSPC 9
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Adam Leslie Burrell
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking (controlled Drugs and Substances Act S.5(2)) / Voir Dire on Charter Application (ss.8,9,24(2)) With Evidence Applied to Trial; Verdict Delivered
Outcome
Evidence excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter; accused acquitted (found not guilty)
Legal Topics
Arbitrary Detention (s.9), Unreasonable Search (s.8), Exclusion of Evidence (s.24(2)), Arrest Without Warrant (criminal Code S.495), Search Incident to Arrest, Medical Marihuana/prescription, Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking (cdsa S.5(2))
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Charter (canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms) Search and Seizure Controlled Substances Law Arbitrary Detention (s.9) Unreasonable Search (s.8) Exclusion of Evidence (s.24(2)) Arrest Without Warrant (criminal Code S.495) +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Adam Leslie Burrell

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking (controlled Drugs and Substances Act S.5(2)) / Voir Dire on Charter Application (ss.8,9,24(2)) With Evidence Applied to Trial; Verdict Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the detention and arrest of the accused were arbitrary and lawful under s.9 of the Charter and Criminal Code s.495
  2. 2 Whether the warrantless search of the vehicle was lawful as a search incident to arrest under s.8 of the Charter
  3. 3 Whether evidence obtained should be excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter given the Charter breaches and surrounding circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The court found on the balance of probabilities that the officers did not have reasonable grounds to effect a lawful arrest for break and enter and the accused was not shown to have been arrested for possession prior to the search; consequently the subsequent warrantless search of the vehicle was not authorized as incident to a lawful arrest (s.8 breach). Applying the Grant factors the court concluded admission of the evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute and therefore excluded the drug evidence under s.24(2), resulting in an acquittal.

Court Disposition

Evidence excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter; accused acquitted (found not guilty)

Orders

  • Controlled substances evidence excluded under s.24(2) Charter ruling
  • Charge of possession for the purpose of trafficking dismissed by verdict of not guilty