R. v. D'Entremont

R. v. D'Entremont

The initial stop and the search for liquor were lawful based on the strong smell of alcohol and the presence of a liquor store bag, giving reasonable grounds to search for liquor; however, the officer expanded the scope of the search when he reached into the leather jacket pocket and conducted a general search for contraband, thereby breaching s.8 of the Charter. The marijuana evidence was therefore excluded under s.24(2) and the accused was acquitted of possession.

Citation
2009 NSPC 39
Parties
Crown: R.; Accused: Raymond L. D'Entremont
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (possession) / Blended Voir Dire/trial (trial Concluded)
Outcome
Not guilty (charge of possession of cannabis dismissed)
Legal Topics
Section 8 Charter Unreasonable Search, Section 24(2) Exclusion of Evidence, Vehicle Checkpoints and Searches, Scope of Search for Specific Purpose, Admissibility of Drug Possession Evidence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Search and Seizure Evidence Regulatory Law (liquor Control) Section 8 Charter Unreasonable Search Section 24(2) Exclusion of Evidence Vehicle Checkpoints and 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R.

Crown

Raymond L. D'Entremont

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (possession) / Blended Voir Dire/trial (trial Concluded)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the vehicle search was lawful
  2. 2 Whether officer had reasonable grounds to search for liquor under the Liquor Control Act
  3. 3 Whether the scope of the search exceeded its lawful purpose and breached s.8 of the Charter

Ratio Decidendi

The initial stop and the search for liquor were lawful based on the strong smell of alcohol and the presence of a liquor store bag, giving reasonable grounds to search for liquor; however, the officer expanded the scope of the search when he reached into the leather jacket pocket and conducted a general search for contraband, thereby breaching s.8 of the Charter. The marijuana evidence was therefore excluded under s.24(2) and the accused was acquitted of possession.

Court Disposition

Not guilty (charge of possession of cannabis dismissed)

Orders

  • Marijuana evidence excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter
  • Accused acquitted of the s.4(1) CDSA possession charge