R. v. Chan

R. v. Chan

On the totality of the admissible and properly amplified material a justice of the peace could reasonably conclude on a credibly‑based probability that the Eldorado suite and the two vehicles were linked to drug trafficking and therefore the warrants for those locations were valid; by contrast there was insufficient evidence linking Riverwalk and Crowley residences to the alleged trafficking, so those warrants were invalid; the safety deposit box warrant was invalid because it relied on items discovered via the unlawful Riverwalk search. Amplification and severability principles applied where appropriate.

Citation
2020 BCSC 776
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Duke Yin Chan; Accused: Lawton Louis Ma
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Charges for Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking (cdsa S.5(2)) / Garofoli Hearing Voir Dire on Validity of Search Warrants (oral Reasons)
Outcome
Search warrant for Eldorado suite and warrants for two vehicles upheld; search warrants for Riverwalk and Crowley residences quashed; warrant for safety deposit box quashed as product of unlawful search.
Legal Topics
Search Warrant Validity, Reasonable Grounds / Reasonable Probability, Excision and Amplification of ITO, Rule Against Narrative and Conclusory Statements, Severability of Warrant Provisions, Stash House Doctrine
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law (charter) Search and Seizure Evidence Search Warrant Validity Reasonable Grounds / Reasonable Probability Excision and Amplification of ITO Rule Against Narrative and Conclusory Statements +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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Duke Yin Chan

Accused

Lawton Louis Ma

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Charges for Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking (cdsa S.5(2)) / Garofoli Hearing Voir Dire on Validity of Search Warrants (oral Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the material in the excised ITO as amplified at voir dire provided reasonable grounds to issue search warrants for each location
  2. 2 Whether there was a sufficient link between alleged drug trafficking and the specific locations (Eldorado, Riverwalk, Crowley, vehicles, safety deposit box)
  3. 3 Whether parts of the ITO were impermissible narrative, conclusory or a fishing expedition and whether amplification could cure defects

Ratio Decidendi

On the totality of the admissible and properly amplified material a justice of the peace could reasonably conclude on a credibly‑based probability that the Eldorado suite and the two vehicles were linked to drug trafficking and therefore the warrants for those locations were valid; by contrast there was insufficient evidence linking Riverwalk and Crowley residences to the alleged trafficking, so those warrants were invalid; the safety deposit box warrant was invalid because it relied on items discovered via the unlawful Riverwalk search. Amplification and severability principles applied where appropriate.

Court Disposition

Search warrant for Eldorado suite and warrants for two vehicles upheld; search warrants for Riverwalk and Crowley residences quashed; warrant for safety deposit box quashed as product of unlawful search.

Orders

  • Warrant to search Eldorado suite validated
  • Warrants to search the two vehicles validated