R. v. Derbyshire

R. v. Derbyshire

s.7 protections did not apply because the defendant was unaware she was speaking to police (consistent with Hart), but the undercover officers' conduct — aggressive approach in a dim garage, implied threats, confinement and intimidation — constituted unfair coercion amounting to an abuse of process; accordingly the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2014 NSSC 371
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Brittany Leigh Derbyshire
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Homicide / Voir Dire (pre Trial)
Outcome
s.7 not breached; abuse of process established; exclude defendant's statements and the physical evidence and locations she identified; no stay of proceedings ordered.
Legal Topics
Charter S.7 Right to Silence, Abuse of Process, Undercover Operations, Exclusion of Evidence, Recording of Police Operations, Mr. Big Jurisprudence
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Evidence Law Procedural Law Charter S.7 Right to Silence Abuse of Process Undercover Operations Exclusion of Evidence +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Brittany Leigh Derbyshire

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Homicide / Voir Dire (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.7 Charter protections (right against self-incrimination and right to make full answer and defence) apply to statements obtained during undercover operations
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of undercover officers constituted an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether failure to record the undercover operation breached procedural fairness and justified exclusion or a stay

Ratio Decidendi

s.7 protections did not apply because the defendant was unaware she was speaking to police (consistent with Hart), but the undercover officers' conduct — aggressive approach in a dim garage, implied threats, confinement and intimidation — constituted unfair coercion amounting to an abuse of process; accordingly the statements and the physical evidence and locations identified by the defendant were excluded as the appropriate remedy, while a stay was not warranted.

Court Disposition

s.7 not breached; abuse of process established; exclude defendant's statements and the physical evidence and locations she identified; no stay of proceedings ordered.

Orders

  • Exclude statements made by Brittany Leigh Derbyshire to the undercover officers on July 14, 2011
  • Exclude physical evidence and locations identified by Brittany Leigh Derbyshire as a result of the undercover operation