R. v. J.M.L.

R. v. J.M.L.

Mandatory DNA orders under s.487.051(1) as applied to young persons do not breach the Charter (ss.7 or 12) because the physical intrusion is minimal and Parliament enacted youth‑specific safeguards (retention and destruction rules in YCJA and DNA Identification Act) that adequately protect privacy; therefore the court must make the DNA order.

Citation
2013 NSPC 10
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Young Person/accused: J.M.L.
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Challenge to Mandatory DNA Order Under Criminal Code and YCJA / Decision on Application for DNA Order at Sentencing / Charter Challenge
Outcome
Application dismissed in part; mandatory DNA order upheld and will be made
Legal Topics
DNA Orders, Mandatory Orders, Charter S.7, Charter S.12, Youth Criminal Justice Act, DNA Identification Act, Retention and Destruction of Records
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Youth Justice Privacy Law DNA Orders Mandatory Orders Charter S.7 Charter S.12 +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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

J.M.L.

Young Person/accused

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Challenge to Mandatory DNA Order Under Criminal Code and YCJA / Decision on Application for DNA Order at Sentencing / Charter Challenge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether mandatory DNA orders under s.487.051(1) of the Criminal Code as applied to young persons violate s.7 of the Charter by being arbitrary or overbroad
  2. 2 Whether mandatory DNA orders as applied to young persons violate s.12 of the Charter as cruel and unusual treatment
  3. 3 Whether youth‑specific safeguards in the YCJA and DNA Identification Act adequately protect privacy interests of young persons

Ratio Decidendi

Mandatory DNA orders under s.487.051(1) as applied to young persons do not breach the Charter (ss.7 or 12) because the physical intrusion is minimal and Parliament enacted youth‑specific safeguards (retention and destruction rules in YCJA and DNA Identification Act) that adequately protect privacy; therefore the court must make the DNA order.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed in part; mandatory DNA order upheld and will be made

Orders

  • Order for taking DNA sample made pursuant to s.487.051(1) of the Criminal Code; retention and destruction of the record to follow YCJA and DNA Identification Act provisions (period of access noted as three years for conditional discharge)