R. v. Lewis

R. v. Lewis

The warrantless entry into the accused's dwelling breached s.8 of the Charter; the Crown failed to prove exigent circumstances under s.487.11 or that alternatives (such as a telewarrant) were impracticable; under the Collins framework the breach was serious and admission of the seized chairs would bring the administration of justice into disrepute, so the evidence was excluded under s.24(2) and the accused was acquitted.

Citation
2004 NSPC 24
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty The Queen; Accused: Andrew John Lewis
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Possession of Stolen Property (s.354(1)(a) C.c.) / Trial Judgment (acquittal)
Outcome
Accused found not guilty; evidence excluded for Charter breach (s.8) under s.24(2).
Legal Topics
Section 8 Charter Unreasonable Search and Seizure, Section 24(2) Charter Exclusion of Evidence, Section 487.11 Criminal Code Exigent Circumstances, Plain View Doctrine, Telewarrant (s.487.1 Criminal Code)
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional/charter Law Search and Seizure Law Evidence Law Section 8 Charter Unreasonable Search and Seizure Section 24(2) Charter Exclusion of Evidence Section 487.11 Criminal Code Exigent Circumstances Plain View Doctrine +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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty The Queen

Crown

Andrew John Lewis

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Possession of Stolen Property (s.354(1)(a) C.c.) / Trial Judgment (acquittal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the warrantless entry into a dwelling was justified by exigent circumstances under s.487.11 Criminal Code
  2. 2 Whether the seizure of items in plain view was lawful
  3. 3 Whether the evidence should be excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter following an s.8 breach

Ratio Decidendi

The warrantless entry into the accused's dwelling breached s.8 of the Charter; the Crown failed to prove exigent circumstances under s.487.11 or that alternatives (such as a telewarrant) were impracticable; under the Collins framework the breach was serious and admission of the seized chairs would bring the administration of justice into disrepute, so the evidence was excluded under s.24(2) and the accused was acquitted.

Court Disposition

Accused found not guilty; evidence excluded for Charter breach (s.8) under s.24(2).

Orders

  • Seized chairs excluded from evidence pursuant to s.24(2) of the Charter
  • Charge of contrary to s.354(1)(a) C.C. dismissed / accused acquitted