R. v. Law

R. v. Law

Adjournment to prioritize the constitutional challenge was denied; the court ordered the outstanding voir dire arguments on the manner of execution and related issues to proceed as scheduled, allowed the defence to foreshadow constitutional submissions, and fixed timelines for addressing the constitutional challenge prior to the court's deliberations and eventual ruling.

Citation
2017 BCSC 1516
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Ying Ho Raymond Law
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial (voir Dire and Pretrial Applications)
Outcome
Application for adjournment denied; voir dire on warrant execution and detention/arrest to proceed as scheduled; constitutional challenge not given priority but may be foreshadowed and will have timelines set
Legal Topics
Search Warrants, Electronic Device Searches, Charter S.8, Charter S.24(2), Adjournment, Case Management, Voir Dire, Detention and Arrest
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Search and Seizure Evidence Charter Law Publication Ban Search Warrants Electronic Device Searches +6 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Ying Ho Raymond Law

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial (voir Dire and Pretrial Applications)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statutory scheme in s.487 of the Criminal Code is constitutionally deficient for failing to permit a justice to curtail the scope of a search warrant, particularly in relation to electronic data
  2. 2 Whether to adjourn completion of the search-warrant voir dire pending resolution of the constitutional challenge
  3. 3 Facial and sub-facial validity of the search warrant

Ratio Decidendi

Adjournment to prioritize the constitutional challenge was denied; the court ordered the outstanding voir dire arguments on the manner of execution and related issues to proceed as scheduled, allowed the defence to foreshadow constitutional submissions, and fixed timelines for addressing the constitutional challenge prior to the court's deliberations and eventual ruling.

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment denied; voir dire on warrant execution and detention/arrest to proceed as scheduled; constitutional challenge not given priority but may be foreshadowed and will have timelines set

Orders

  • Voir dire arguments to proceed on the scheduled days (tomorrow and Friday)
  • Court will endeavour to give judgment on warrant and related s.8 issues on August 25, 2017