R. v. Nguyen

R. v. Nguyen

Given a priority 1 911 call reporting a break-and-enter, the occupants' evasive conduct (closing curtains, failure to respond to loud knocks and announcements) and the reasonable belief that persons might be inside created exigent circumstances justifying a warrantless forced entry; the police acted in good faith, s.8 was not infringed and the evidence obtained after arrest is admissible.

Citation
2000 BCSC 1547
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Toan Duc Nguyen; Accused: Huan Ngoc Dang
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 October 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Charges of Production of Cannabis and Possession for Purpose of Trafficking / Voir Dire on S.8 Canadian Charter; Admissibility Ruling Delivered
Outcome
Voir dire dismissed; Charter s.8 application denied; evidence obtained after the entry and arrest admitted; arrests held lawful.
Legal Topics
Warrantless Entry, Exigent Circumstances, Section 8 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Admissibility of Evidence, Arrest in Dwelling, 911 Emergency Calls
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Search and Seizure Evidence Warrantless Entry Exigent Circumstances Section 8 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Admissibility of Evidence +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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Toan Duc Nguyen

Accused

Huan Ngoc Dang

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Charges of Production of Cannabis and Possession for Purpose of Trafficking / Voir Dire on S.8 Canadian Charter; Admissibility Ruling Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the warrantless forced entry into the dwelling was justified by exigent circumstances
  2. 2 Whether the accused's s.8 Charter rights were infringed
  3. 3 Whether evidence discovered after entry and arrest is admissible

Ratio Decidendi

Given a priority 1 911 call reporting a break-and-enter, the occupants' evasive conduct (closing curtains, failure to respond to loud knocks and announcements) and the reasonable belief that persons might be inside created exigent circumstances justifying a warrantless forced entry; the police acted in good faith, s.8 was not infringed and the evidence obtained after arrest is admissible.

Court Disposition

Voir dire dismissed; Charter s.8 application denied; evidence obtained after the entry and arrest admitted; arrests held lawful.

Orders

  • Charter s.8 application dismissed
  • Evidence obtained after the warrantless entry and arrest is admissible at trial