R. v. Skinner

R. v. Skinner

The warrantless entry and search were unlawful, the accused's consent was induced and terminated when police discovered incriminating items, the accused was not promptly informed of s.10(b) rights, and consequently the incriminating evidence must be excluded under s.24(2) because its admission would bring the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2005 NSSC 246
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty The Queen; Accused: Steven Douglas Skinner
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Charter S.8,9,10 and S.24(2) Exclusion Application (pre Trial)
Outcome
Application granted; evidence excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter
Legal Topics
Charter S.8 Search and Seizure, Charter S.10(b) Right to Counsel, Exclusion of Evidence S.24(2), Consent to Search, Warrant Requirement and Hot Pursuit, Police Credibility and Integrity
Source Language
english
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Search and Seizure Law Evidence Law Charter S.8 Search and Seizure Charter S.10(b) Right to Counsel Exclusion of Evidence S.24(2) Consent to Search +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty The Queen

Crown

Steven Douglas Skinner

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Charter S.8,9,10 and S.24(2) Exclusion Application (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Were the warrantless entry and search of the accused's home lawful?
  2. 2 Was the accused's consent to search voluntary or induced by threat?
  3. 3 Did the accused receive prompt s.10(b) advice of right to counsel upon arrest/detention?

Ratio Decidendi

The warrantless entry and search were unlawful, the accused's consent was induced and terminated when police discovered incriminating items, the accused was not promptly informed of s.10(b) rights, and consequently the incriminating evidence must be excluded under s.24(2) because its admission would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

Court Disposition

Application granted; evidence excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter

Orders

  • Accused's application to exclude evidence under s.24(2) granted
  • All incriminating evidence obtained as a result of the warrantless entry and search is excluded from the Crown's case