R. v. Patriquen

R. v. Patriquen

The parcel's removal from the mail system by Canada Post constituted a seizure under s.8; Corporal Mellon had reasonable and probable grounds and exigent circumstances existed that justified the warrantless seizure until a warrant was obtained; the subsequent search was authorized and conducted reasonably, and admission of the real, non-conscriptive evidence would not render the trial unfair, so the evidence is admissible (application to exclude dismissed).

Citation
2002 NSSC 46
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Michael Ronald Patriquen; Applicant/accused: Marvin Reginald Coates
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal — Charter Application (s.8 Search and Seizure; S.24(2) Exclusion) / Pre Trial Application Hearing (motion to Exclude Evidence)
Outcome
Application to exclude evidence dismissed; evidence admitted.
Legal Topics
Charter S.8 (search and Seizure), Charter S.24(2) (exclusion of Evidence), Warrant and Warrantless Seizure, Exigent Circumstances, Reasonable and Probable Grounds, Admissibility of Real Evidence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Evidence Law Administrative Law Charter S.8 (search and Seizure) Charter S.24(2) (exclusion of Evidence) Warrant and Warrantless Seizure Exigent Circumstances +2 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Michael Ronald Patriquen

Accused

Marvin Reginald Coates

Applicant/accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal — Charter Application (s.8 Search and Seizure; S.24(2) Exclusion) / Pre Trial Application Hearing (motion to Exclude Evidence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was Canada Post's holding of the parcel a seizure under s.8 of the Charter?
  2. 2 If a seizure occurred prior to a warrant, did officers have reasonable and probable grounds to justify it?
  3. 3 Did exigent circumstances exist to justify the warrantless seizure?

Ratio Decidendi

The parcel's removal from the mail system by Canada Post constituted a seizure under s.8; Corporal Mellon had reasonable and probable grounds and exigent circumstances existed that justified the warrantless seizure until a warrant was obtained; the subsequent search was authorized and conducted reasonably, and admission of the real, non-conscriptive evidence would not render the trial unfair, so the evidence is admissible (application to exclude dismissed).

Court Disposition

Application to exclude evidence dismissed; evidence admitted.

Orders

  • Application to exclude evidence under s.24(2) dismissed
  • Evidence obtained from parcel admitted into evidence