R. v. Singer

R. v. Singer

The telewarrant and underlying ITO were invalid because the impracticability requirement was not properly established and the ITO omitted a material fact (the target left during surveillance) undermining corroboration of an informant; the search was also conducted unreasonably because the police failed to properly knock and announce before forcible entry; officers elicited incriminating information after Singer requested counsel contrary to s.10(b); cumulatively these Charter breaches were serious and their admission would bring the administration of justice into disrepute, therefore the evidence and statements obtained were excluded under s.24(2).

Citation
2012 NSSC 238
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty The Queen; Defendant: Cyril Singer
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Voir Dire (s.24(2) Exclusion Application)
Outcome
Application granted; search warrant declared invalid and evidence obtained and statements elicited excluded pursuant to s.24(2) of the Charter.
Legal Topics
Section 8 Charter Unreasonable Search, Section 10(b) Charter Right to Counsel, Telewarrant / S.487.1 Criminal Code, Search Warrant Sufficiency and Informant Reliability, Knock and Announce Rule, Exclusion of Evidence Under S.24(2)
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Evidence Search and Seizure Section 8 Charter Unreasonable Search Section 10(b) Charter Right to Counsel Telewarrant / S.487.1 Criminal Code Search Warrant Sufficiency and Informant Reliability +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 6 Authorities cited 32 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty The Queen

Crown

Cyril Singer

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Voir Dire (s.24(2) Exclusion Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Validity of telewarrant under s.487.1 Criminal Code
  2. 2 Sufficiency and disclosure in the Information To Obtain (ITO) supporting the search warrant
  3. 3 Reasonableness of the manner of execution (knock and announce/dynamic entry)

Ratio Decidendi

The telewarrant and underlying ITO were invalid because the impracticability requirement was not properly established and the ITO omitted a material fact (the target left during surveillance) undermining corroboration of an informant; the search was also conducted unreasonably because the police failed to properly knock and announce before forcible entry; officers elicited incriminating information after Singer requested counsel contrary to s.10(b); cumulatively these Charter breaches were serious and their admission would bring the administration of justice into disrepute, therefore the evidence and statements obtained were excluded under s.24(2).

Court Disposition

Application granted; search warrant declared invalid and evidence obtained and statements elicited excluded pursuant to s.24(2) of the Charter.

Orders

  • Search warrant for 60 Brunswick Street, Truro declared invalid.
  • Application to exclude evidence granted.