R. v. Rondelet

R. v. Rondelet

Because the Crown conceded a s.10(b) Prosper-warning breach, a s.24(2) Grant balancing was required; the court found the breach less serious with respect to statutorily compelled breath samples (s.254) which are reliable and minimally intrusive and therefore admissible, but found the non-compelled utterances inherently less reliable and made without a Prosper warning so they must be excluded.

Citation
2013 NSPC 74
Parties
Prosecution: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Kirby Rondelet
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Impaired Driving / Voir Dire / Pre Trial Admissibility Ruling (blended Voir Dire)
Outcome
Partial: breath analysis admitted; post-arrest statements excluded.
Legal Topics
Charter S.10(b) Right to Counsel, S.24(2) Exclusion of Evidence, Prosper Warning (change of Mind Waiver), Breathalyzer / S.254 Analysis, Voluntariness of Statements
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Evidence Law Charter S.10(b) Right to Counsel S.24(2) Exclusion of Evidence Prosper Warning (change of Mind Waiver) Breathalyzer / S.254 Analysis Voluntariness of Statements

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Prosecution

Kirby Rondelet

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Impaired Driving / Voir Dire / Pre Trial Admissibility Ruling (blended Voir Dire)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a s.10(b) Charter breach occurred (conceded)
  2. 2 Whether evidence obtained after the Prosper-warning breach (breath analyses and utterances) should be excluded under s.24(2) Grant analysis
  3. 3 Whether a Prosper warning was required and whether any waiver was valid

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Crown conceded a s.10(b) Prosper-warning breach, a s.24(2) Grant balancing was required; the court found the breach less serious with respect to statutorily compelled breath samples (s.254) which are reliable and minimally intrusive and therefore admissible, but found the non-compelled utterances inherently less reliable and made without a Prosper warning so they must be excluded.

Court Disposition

Partial: breath analysis admitted; post-arrest statements excluded.

Orders

  • Admit the results of the breath analysis performed by Cpl. Lisa Dawn Whittington.
  • Exclude the utterances/statements made by Kirby Rondelet to Cpl. Whittington and Cst. Sutherland following the acknowledged s.10(b) Prosper-warning breach.