R. v. Sunner

R. v. Sunner

Although the issuing justice erred and the warrant was invalid, producing a s.8 breach, the Grant factors weighed in favour of admission: the police conduct fell in the middle of the spectrum (not deliberate bad faith), they acted on a warrant valid on its face after a substantial investigation into ongoing drug trafficking, the seized non‑bodily physical evidence was reliable and essential to the Crown's case, and therefore admitting the evidence would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute; the s.24(2) application was dismissed.

Citation
2017 BCSC 2444
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Rajvir Sunner
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Trafficking and Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking / Voir Dire / S.24(2) Charter Admissibility Ruling (pre Trial)
Outcome
Application to exclude evidence under s.24(2) dismissed; evidence admitted
Legal Topics
Search Warrant Validity, Reasonable and Probable Grounds, Privacy in Dwelling House, Grant Factors, Exclusionary Rule
Source Language
English
Charter (s.8 Search and Seizure) Charter (s.24(2) Exclusion of Evidence) Criminal Law Drug Offences Search Warrant Validity Reasonable and Probable Grounds Privacy in Dwelling House Grant Factors +1 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Rajvir Sunner

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Trafficking and Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking / Voir Dire / S.24(2) Charter Admissibility Ruling (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the search warrant for 8815 116 Street was supported by reasonable grounds
  2. 2 Whether the search violated s.8 of the Charter
  3. 3 Whether evidence obtained should be excluded under s.24(2) using the Grant framework

Ratio Decidendi

Although the issuing justice erred and the warrant was invalid, producing a s.8 breach, the Grant factors weighed in favour of admission: the police conduct fell in the middle of the spectrum (not deliberate bad faith), they acted on a warrant valid on its face after a substantial investigation into ongoing drug trafficking, the seized non‑bodily physical evidence was reliable and essential to the Crown's case, and therefore admitting the evidence would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute; the s.24(2) application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application to exclude evidence under s.24(2) dismissed; evidence admitted

Orders

  • Evidence seized from the search of 8815 116 Street, Delta on April 23, 2015 admitted under s.24(2) of the Charter
  • Application to exclude the evidence dismissed