R. v. Patriquen

R. v. Patriquen

April 16, 1999 search: reasonable and probable grounds existed but exigent circumstances did not; search was contrary to s.8 though the resulting real cash evidence was admitted under s.24(2) because breach was not flagrant, police acted in good faith and admission would not render trial unfair. May 18, 1999 search: reasonable and probable grounds plus exigent circumstances existed; search lawful and evidence admissible.

Citation
2002 NSSC 47
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Applicant/accused: Michael Ronald Patriquen; Accused: Marvin Reginald Coates
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Charter Application S.8 Search and S.24(2) / Decision on Pre Trial Exclusion Application
Outcome
Application to exclude evidence dismissed overall: April 16 search found unconstitutional under s.8 but evidence admitted under s.24(2); May 18 search found lawful and evidence admitted.
Legal Topics
Section 8, Section 24(2), Exigent Circumstances, Warrantless Search, Admissibility of Real Evidence
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Evidence Law Search and Seizure Section 8 Section 24(2) Exigent Circumstances Warrantless Search +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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Michael Ronald Patriquen

Applicant/accused

Marvin Reginald Coates

Accused

Procedural Posture

Charter Application S.8 Search and S.24(2) / Decision on Pre Trial Exclusion Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the April 16, 1999 warrantless search of luggage was authorized by law and reasonable under s.8 of the Charter
  2. 2 Whether exigent circumstances existed on April 16 and May 18, 1999
  3. 3 Whether evidence obtained in breach of s.8 should be excluded under s.24(2)

Ratio Decidendi

April 16, 1999 search: reasonable and probable grounds existed but exigent circumstances did not; search was contrary to s.8 though the resulting real cash evidence was admitted under s.24(2) because breach was not flagrant, police acted in good faith and admission would not render trial unfair. May 18, 1999 search: reasonable and probable grounds plus exigent circumstances existed; search lawful and evidence admissible.

Court Disposition

Application to exclude evidence dismissed overall: April 16 search found unconstitutional under s.8 but evidence admitted under s.24(2); May 18 search found lawful and evidence admitted.

Orders

  • No exclusion ordered; evidence from April 16, 1999 search admitted under s.24(2) despite s.8 breach
  • Evidence from May 18, 1999 search admitted as lawfully obtained