R. v. Adam et al

R. v. Adam et al

The authorizing judge had sufficient material before him showing a criminal association between Morin and Cox and reasonable and probable grounds that intercepting Morin's communications would assist the investigation of the conspiracy to commit murder; accordingly the targeting of Morin was lawful and the application to exclude the evidence is dismissed.

Citation
2006 BCSC 127
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Wade Alex Adam; Accused: Sean William Doak; Accused: Robert Vaughn Hamm; Accused: Bryon John Newberry; Accused: Shane Jason Schindler; Accused: Thomas William Westle; Accused: Trevor Lee Ernest Zacharuk
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 January 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Pre Trial Application to Review Interception Authorization and Exclude Evidence Under the Charter / Application to Review Authorizing Judge's Granting of P1 2000 and Motion Under S.24(2) at Preliminary Inquiry
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Interception of Private Communications, Known Person Test, Reasonable and Probable Grounds, Exclusion of Evidence Under S.24(2), Publication and Non Identification Orders
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Charter Litigation Search and Seizure Wiretap Law Publication Ban Interception of Private Communications Known Person Test Reasonable and Probable Grounds +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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Wade Alex Adam

Accused

Sean William Doak

Accused

Robert Vaughn Hamm

Accused

Bryon John Newberry

Accused

Shane Jason Schindler

Accused

Thomas William Westle

Accused

Trevor Lee Ernest Zacharuk

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Pre Trial Application to Review Interception Authorization and Exclude Evidence Under the Charter / Application to Review Authorizing Judge's Granting of P1 2000 and Motion Under S.24(2) at Preliminary Inquiry

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether P1-2000 improperly targeted Gerard Majella Morin contrary to the Criminal Code
  2. 2 Whether interception of Morin's communications violated s.8 of the Charter
  3. 3 Whether evidence obtained should be excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter

Ratio Decidendi

The authorizing judge had sufficient material before him showing a criminal association between Morin and Cox and reasonable and probable grounds that intercepting Morin's communications would assist the investigation of the conspiracy to commit murder; accordingly the targeting of Morin was lawful and the application to exclude the evidence is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • Evidence taken and submissions made in this proceeding at any time when the jury is not present shall not be published in any newspaper, Internet or other broadcast until the jury has rendered its verdict.
  • Publication and broadcasting in print, television, film, radio and the Internet of any information tending or serving to publicly identify the undercover police officers in the investigation is prohibited, including likenesses, attire appearance and physical description of the officers.