R. v. Carpenter

R. v. Carpenter

The court held that the officer had reasonable suspicion to detain and reasonably and properly opened the car door under common‑law police safety powers and, after detecting a strong odour of alcohol and slurred speech, had reasonable and probable grounds to arrest; there was a breach of s.7 because the Crown failed to preserve/produce the dispatch recording through unacceptable negligence, but that loss was only marginally prejudicial and did not itself require a stay; however, the cumulative and unexplained Crown delay (including institutional delay and the disclosure failure) of 22 months attributable to the Crown violated s.11(b), and the appropriate remedy was a stay of proceedings,...

Citation
2014 NSPC 122
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Charles Anthony Carpenter
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Blended Trial and Voir Dire; Charter Applications for Exclusion and Stay
Outcome
Stay of proceedings granted for breaches including unreasonable delay under s.11(b) of the Charter
Legal Topics
Impaired Driving, Detention and Arrest, Search and Seizure, Disclosure Obligations, Lost/destroyed Evidence, Unreasonable Delay (s.11(b)), Remedies (stay of Proceedings), Reasonable and Probable Grounds, Police Safety Searches
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional (charter) Law Evidence Law Procedural Law Impaired Driving Detention and Arrest Search and Seizure Disclosure Obligations +5 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 7 Authorities cited 29 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Charles Anthony Carpenter

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Blended Trial and Voir Dire; Charter Applications for Exclusion and Stay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.7 right to make full answer and defence breached by non‑disclosure/loss of police dispatch recording
  2. 2 Whether s.8 unreasonable search and seizure occurred when officer opened car door
  3. 3 Whether s.9 arbitrary detention occurred when officer detained/approached vehicle

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the officer had reasonable suspicion to detain and reasonably and properly opened the car door under common‑law police safety powers and, after detecting a strong odour of alcohol and slurred speech, had reasonable and probable grounds to arrest; there was a breach of s.7 because the Crown failed to preserve/produce the dispatch recording through unacceptable negligence, but that loss was only marginally prejudicial and did not itself require a stay; however, the cumulative and unexplained Crown delay (including institutional delay and the disclosure failure) of 22 months attributable to the Crown violated s.11(b), and the appropriate remedy was a stay of proceedings,...

Court Disposition

Stay of proceedings granted for breaches including unreasonable delay under s.11(b) of the Charter

Orders

  • Stay of proceedings; charges under s.253(1)(a) and s.253(1)(b) of the Criminal Code stayed