R. v. Bourque

R. v. Bourque

The information to obtain, after excising an inaccurate paragraph and specific numeric boasting about prior cases, contained sufficient reliable information by amplification to support issuance of the warrant; the Tariff is constitutionally valid in this regulatory context and customers have a low expectation of privacy with respect to Hydro access for meter/equipment inspection even when that inquiry may reveal criminal theft; the police execution on September 11, 1999 was an unreasonable s.8 breach due to forcible no‑notice entry, but the breach was not sufficiently serious or in bad faith to warrant exclusion under s.24(2), so the evidence is admissible.

Citation
2001 BCSC 621
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Joseph Laurent Jocelyn Bourque
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 April 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Voir Dire (ruling on Admissibility and S.8/s.24(2) Issues)
Outcome
Voir dire ruling: information to obtain upheld as sufficient after limited excisions and amplification; Tariff held constitutional for access in this context; police entry unreasonable and violated s.8; evidence nevertheless admissible under s.24(2).
Legal Topics
Section 8 Charter, Section 24(2) Charter Exclusion, Search Warrant Sufficiency, Regulatory Access Provisions (hydro Tariff), Police Entry and Execution, Amplification of Warrant Materials
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Administrative/regulatory Law Search and Seizure Section 8 Charter Section 24(2) Charter Exclusion Search Warrant Sufficiency Regulatory Access Provisions (hydro Tariff) +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 4 Authorities cited 31 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Joseph Laurent Jocelyn Bourque

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Voir Dire (ruling on Admissibility and S.8/s.24(2) Issues)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the information to obtain the search warrant contained sufficient reliable information
  2. 2 Whether the B.C. Hydro Tariff authorizing access to premises is constitutionally valid when used to investigate criminal offences
  3. 3 Whether the execution of the search warrant on September 11, 1999 was reasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The information to obtain, after excising an inaccurate paragraph and specific numeric boasting about prior cases, contained sufficient reliable information by amplification to support issuance of the warrant; the Tariff is constitutionally valid in this regulatory context and customers have a low expectation of privacy with respect to Hydro access for meter/equipment inspection even when that inquiry may reveal criminal theft; the police execution on September 11, 1999 was an unreasonable s.8 breach due to forcible no‑notice entry, but the breach was not sufficiently serious or in bad faith to warrant exclusion under s.24(2), so the evidence is admissible.

Court Disposition

Voir dire ruling: information to obtain upheld as sufficient after limited excisions and amplification; Tariff held constitutional for access in this context; police entry unreasonable and violated s.8; evidence nevertheless admissible under s.24(2).

Orders

  • Search warrant issued September 11, 1999 remains valid as supported by sufficient reliable information after excising paragraph four and specific numeric assertions
  • Evidence obtained during execution of the search warrant on September 11, 1999 is admissible