R. v. Cater

R. v. Cater

The application for additional disclosure was dismissed because the material sought was largely irrelevant to the authorization and the charges or would risk disclosure of confidential informant identities protected by absolute informer privilege; no evidentiary basis was shown for a Charter breach or the grant of leave to cross-examine the affiant under Garofoli, and a stay was unjustified.

Citation
2011 NSPC 86
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty The Queen; Accused: Kyle Cater; Accused: Paul Cater; Accused: Torina Lewis
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Weapons Possession and Weapons Trafficking; Wiretap Authorization/disclosure Motions / Pre Trial: Disclosure Application (stinchcombe/garofoli) and Related Charter/abuse of Process Applications
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Stinchcombe Disclosure, Garofoli Review, Informer Privilege, Innocence at Stake Exception, Abuse of Process, Stay of Proceedings, Leave to Cross Examine Affiant
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Charter (s.7) Evidence Wiretap/interception (criminal Code Part Vi) Police Informant Law Procedural Law Disclosure Stinchcombe Disclosure Garofoli Review +5 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 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty The Queen

Crown

Kyle Cater

Accused

Paul Cater

Accused

Torina Lewis

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Weapons Possession and Weapons Trafficking; Wiretap Authorization/disclosure Motions / Pre Trial: Disclosure Application (stinchcombe/garofoli) and Related Charter/abuse of Process Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether requested police records and source information are relevant to make full answer and defence or to a Garofoli application
  2. 2 Whether disclosure would breach informer privilege or risk identifying confidential informants
  3. 3 Whether non-disclosure warrants a stay of proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The application for additional disclosure was dismissed because the material sought was largely irrelevant to the authorization and the charges or would risk disclosure of confidential informant identities protected by absolute informer privilege; no evidentiary basis was shown for a Charter breach or the grant of leave to cross-examine the affiant under Garofoli, and a stay was unjustified.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for additional disclosure as set out in defence brief dismissed
  • No stay of proceedings ordered