R. v. Belcourt

R. v. Belcourt

The court declined to hold the proposed voir dire because the accused failed to provide an evidentiary foundation that would support a reasonable expectation of privacy in the Thunderbird, its trunk, or the seized items; transient use, loaned keys, presence in the vehicle and forensic traces (DNA/fingerprints) were insufficient to establish standing under s.8 of the Charter, applying Vukelich, Edwards and Belnavis.

Citation
2012 BCSC 229
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Andrew Jonathan Belcourt; Accused: Samuel McGrath
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Pre Trial Charter Application / Vukelich Notice/voir Dire on Standing Declined
Outcome
Proposed voir dire declined; accused lack standing to challenge the search of the Thunderbird or its contents under s.8 of the Charter
Legal Topics
Section 8 Charter, Standing, Expectation of Privacy, Vehicle Searches, Third Party Premises, Vukelich Procedure
Source Language
English
Charter Criminal Law Evidence Search and Seizure Section 8 Charter Standing Expectation of Privacy Vehicle Searches +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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Andrew Jonathan Belcourt

Accused

Samuel McGrath

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Pre Trial Charter Application / Vukelich Notice/voir Dire on Standing Declined

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused had standing to challenge the vehicle search under s.8 of the Charter
  2. 2 Whether passengers in the vehicle had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the vehicle, trunk or items seized
  3. 3 Whether possession, DNA or fingerprints alone establish a protected privacy interest

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to hold the proposed voir dire because the accused failed to provide an evidentiary foundation that would support a reasonable expectation of privacy in the Thunderbird, its trunk, or the seized items; transient use, loaned keys, presence in the vehicle and forensic traces (DNA/fingerprints) were insufficient to establish standing under s.8 of the Charter, applying Vukelich, Edwards and Belnavis.

Court Disposition

Proposed voir dire declined; accused lack standing to challenge the search of the Thunderbird or its contents under s.8 of the Charter

Orders

  • Voir dire refused pursuant to the Vukelich threshold; no Charter s.8 hearing on admissibility
  • Publication ban pursuant to s.648(1) of the Criminal Code (as noted in the file)