R. v. T. A.

R. v. T. A.

The court applied s.487.051(3) and related jurisprudence, found the young person's extensive criminal record (51 convictions, including violent and primary designated offences), the serious and premeditated nature of the robbery and the minimal demonstrated impact on privacy/security given his age meant the state interest in obtaining a DNA sample outweighed privacy interests; therefore a DNA order was authorized under s.487.051(1)(b).

Citation
2004 NSPC 18
Parties
Crown: R.; Accused (young Person): T. A.
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal DNA Order Application Under S.487.051 / Post Conviction/sentencing Application for DNA Order
Outcome
Application granted; DNA order authorized under s.487.051(1)(b)
Legal Topics
DNA Order, Section 487.051, Youth Criminal Justice Act, Privacy and Security of the Person, Robbery
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Youth Justice Evidence DNA Identification DNA Order Section 487.051 Youth Criminal Justice Act Privacy and Security of the Person +1 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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R.

Crown

T. A.

Accused (young Person)

Procedural Posture

Criminal DNA Order Application Under S.487.051 / Post Conviction/sentencing Application for DNA Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a DNA order should be made under s.487.051(1)(b) for a secondary designated offence (robbery) involving a young person
  2. 2 Whether principles of the Youth Criminal Justice Act alter the test for DNA orders for young persons
  3. 3 How to balance state interests in DNA collection against the young person's privacy and security of the person under s.487.051(3)

Ratio Decidendi

The court applied s.487.051(3) and related jurisprudence, found the young person's extensive criminal record (51 convictions, including violent and primary designated offences), the serious and premeditated nature of the robbery and the minimal demonstrated impact on privacy/security given his age meant the state interest in obtaining a DNA sample outweighed privacy interests; therefore a DNA order was authorized under s.487.051(1)(b).

Court Disposition

Application granted; DNA order authorized under s.487.051(1)(b)

Orders

  • Authorize taking of such bodily substances of T. A. as are reasonably required for the purpose of forensic DNA analysis pursuant to s.487.051(1)(b)
  • Sentence of 18 months custody and supervision (imposed November 14, 2003) consecutive to time already subject to