R. v. Meiz
The observed facts at the door—marijuana smoke, the appellant's suspicious conduct, and visible drug-related items—viewed reasonably and cumulatively by the experienced officer, constituted reasonable grounds for arrest; therefore the arrest was lawful, did not breach s.9, and subsequent improper police conduct did...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2014 ONCA 209
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Haytham Ayman Meiz
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 20 March 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.
- Legal Topics
- Lawful Arrest, Section 9 Arbitrary Detention, Reasonable Grounds for Arrest, Admissibility of Evidence
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Haytham Ayman Meiz
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the arrest at the apartment door was lawful
- 2 Whether the arrest breached s.9 of the Charter
- 3 Whether subsequent police conduct affected admissibility of evidence
Ratio Decidendi
The observed facts at the door—marijuana smoke, the appellant's suspicious conduct, and visible drug-related items—viewed reasonably and cumulatively by the experienced officer, constituted reasonable grounds for arrest; therefore the arrest was lawful, did not breach s.9, and subsequent improper police conduct did not render the evidence inadmissible in these circumstances.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Conviction upheld
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Meiz Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2014-03-20 Neutral citation 2014 ONCA 209 Docket numbers C55769 Judges Doherty, David H.; Laskin, John Ivan; Feldman, Kathryn N. Subject Criminal Decision Content COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: R. v. Meiz, 2014 ONCA 209 DATE: 20140320 DOCKET: C55769 Doherty, Laskin and Feldman JJ.A. BETWEEN Her Majesty the Queen Respondent and Haytham Ayman Meiz Appellant Tyler Botten, for the appellant Moiz Rahman and Moray Welch, for the respondent Heard and released orally: March 17, 2014 On appeal from the conviction entered by Justice Toscano Roccamo of the Superior Court of Justice, dated June 30, 2011. ENDORSEMENT [1] As ably argued by counsel for the appellant, this appeal turns on the lawfulness and, therefore, the constitutionality of the arrest that took place at the door to the appellant’s apartment. The applicable law is not in dispute: see R. v. Storrey, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 241; and the trial judge’s factual findings are not challenged. [2] Despite some confusion in the trial judge’s terminology between the grounds for detention and the grounds for arrest, the findings of fact made by the trial judge provided ample grounds for the appellant’s arrest. Those findings included: · the marihuana smoke coming from the room when the police questioned the appellant at the door; · the appellant’s suspicious conduct at the door when being questioned by the police; and · the items (a weigh scale, white powder on the weigh scale, and a pill beside the weigh scale) observed on the shelf in the appellant’s room by the officer when he was standing at the door. [3] This constellation of facts, viewed reasonably and cumulatively by someone with the experience of the police officer in question, provided ample grounds for the appellant’s arrest. [4] As the arrest was lawful and, therefore, not a breach of s. 9, the subsequent conduct of the police, although clearly improper, could not impact on the admissibility of the evidence in question. We stress that we come to this conclusion in the circumstances of this case. [5] The appeal is dismissed. “Doherty J.A.” “John Laskin J.A.” “K. Feldman J.A.”