R. v. Robertson

R. v. Robertson

Application dismissed: defence failed to meet the minimal relevance threshold established in McKay for production of background SHNs/SDRs not before the issuing judge; the redacted materials already provided did not establish a basis for further in camera review and disclosure; additionally, informant privilege bars the requested disclosure and judicial involvement in editing privileged materials; accordingly no unredacted SHNs/SDRs were ordered produced.

Citation
2016 BCSC 2075
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Jason Robertson; Accused: Sarah Robertson
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Search Warrant Challenge (garofoli Application) / Disclosure Application Ruling (pre Trial)
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Search Warrant Challenge, Garofoli Hearing, Disclosure (stinchcombe), Informant Privilege, ITO Accuracy, S.24(2) Exclusion Analysis
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Evidence Procedural Law Informant Privilege Search and Seizure Search Warrant Challenge Garofoli Hearing +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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Jason Robertson

Accused

Sarah Robertson

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Search Warrant Challenge (garofoli Application) / Disclosure Application Ruling (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether court should review unredacted Source Handler Notes (SHNs) and Source Debriefing Reports (SDRs) in camera to determine accuracy of paragraph 21 of the Information to Obtain (ITO)
  2. 2 Whether the defence met the minimal relevance threshold for disclosure under R. v. McKay
  3. 3 Whether informant privilege bars the requested disclosure

Ratio Decidendi

Application dismissed: defence failed to meet the minimal relevance threshold established in McKay for production of background SHNs/SDRs not before the issuing judge; the redacted materials already provided did not establish a basis for further in camera review and disclosure; additionally, informant privilege bars the requested disclosure and judicial involvement in editing privileged materials; accordingly no unredacted SHNs/SDRs were ordered produced.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for in camera review and disclosure of unredacted SHNs and SDRs dismissed
  • No further disclosure of unredacted SHNs and SDRs ordered