R. v. Ly

R. v. Ly

Court found proven breaches (dog bite engaging s.7, delay in informing in language under s.10(a), delay in bringing before justice in breach of s.503/s.9, and s.8 breach in returning detainee to property) but concluded breaches were largely inadvertent or of limited seriousness, unconnected to the search evidence,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2012 BCSC 504
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Cheuk Bun Lee; Accused: Kiet Tu Ly; Accused: Siu Shing Wong
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application to Exclude Evidence Under S.24(2) Charter (voir Dire)
Outcome
Application to exclude evidence under s.24(2) dismissed; search evidence admitted
Legal Topics
Section 24(2) Exclusion of Evidence, Section 10 Charter (information and Right to Counsel), Section 7 Charter (security of the Person), Section 8 Unreasonable Search and Seizure, Section 9 / S.503 Criminal Code (detention Timing), Police Use of Service Dogs, Return of Detainee to Scene/identity Verification
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Section 24(2) Exclusion of Evidence Section 10 Charter (information and Right to Counsel) Section 7 Charter (security of the Person) Section 8 Unreasonable Search and Seizure Section 9 / S.503 Criminal Code (detention Timing) Police Use of Service Dogs +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Cheuk Bun Lee

Accused

Kiet Tu Ly

Accused

Siu Shing Wong

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application to Exclude Evidence Under S.24(2) Charter (voir Dire)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether police delay and language failures breached s.10(a)/(b) of the Charter
  2. 2 Whether photographing arrestee at scene before counsel amounted to eliciting evidence in breach of s.10(b)
  3. 3 Whether a police dog bite on a compliant, handcuffed detainee violated Charter s.7/s.12

Ratio Decidendi

Court found proven breaches (dog bite engaging s.7, delay in informing in language under s.10(a), delay in bringing before justice in breach of s.503/s.9, and s.8 breach in returning detainee to property) but concluded breaches were largely inadvertent or of limited seriousness, unconnected to the search evidence, and the search evidence was reliable and essential to truth‑seeking; therefore s.24(2) remedy excluding the fruits of the search was not warranted and application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

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