R. v. Schirmer

R. v. Schirmer

The court found no Charter breaches: evidence showed the accused injured his ankle while fleeing (jumping a bike rack), not from excessive police force (s.7); the satchel was abandoned and left in plain view in a third party's yard so no reasonable expectation of privacy and the search did not breach s.8; arrest was lawful on outstanding warrants and for flight and, once the bag was examined, police had reasonable grounds for PPT, so there was no arbitrary detention under s.9.

Citation
2020 BCSC 209
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Horst Schirmer
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Indictment / Voir Dire (reasons for Judgment on Charter Applications)
Outcome
All Charter applications dismissed; no breaches of ss.7, 8 or 9 found.
Legal Topics
Section 7 Excessive Force on Arrest, Section 8 Search and Seizure and Abandonment, Section 9 Arbitrary Detention/arrest, Section 10(b) Right to Counsel, Voluntariness of Statements
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Evidence Section 7 Excessive Force on Arrest Section 8 Search and Seizure and Abandonment Section 9 Arbitrary Detention/arrest Section 10(b) Right to Counsel Voluntariness of Statements

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Horst Schirmer

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Indictment / Voir Dire (reasons for Judgment on Charter Applications)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether arrest used excessive force contrary to s.7 Charter
  2. 2 Whether warrantless search of satchel violated s.8 Charter (expectation of privacy/abandonment)
  3. 3 Whether detention/arrest for possession for purpose of trafficking was arbitrary under s.9 Charter

Ratio Decidendi

The court found no Charter breaches: evidence showed the accused injured his ankle while fleeing (jumping a bike rack), not from excessive police force (s.7); the satchel was abandoned and left in plain view in a third party's yard so no reasonable expectation of privacy and the search did not breach s.8; arrest was lawful on outstanding warrants and for flight and, once the bag was examined, police had reasonable grounds for PPT, so there was no arbitrary detention under s.9.

Court Disposition

All Charter applications dismissed; no breaches of ss.7, 8 or 9 found.

Orders

  • Applications dismissed
  • No remedy under s.24(2) granted