R. v. Harvey

R. v. Harvey

The seizure was lawful: officers were legally on the property and the rifle was lawfully seized under the plain view doctrine and, alternatively, s.171.02(1) given exigent circumstances; the rifle was 'stored' because it was intentionally left out of the accused's immediate control for retrievable use later; the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2007 NSPC 16
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Jason Harvey
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial — Decision on Charter Application and Guilt
Outcome
Guilty — convicted of careless storage of a firearm contrary to s.86(1) Criminal Code; conviction entered.
Legal Topics
Careless Storage of Firearm, Search and Seizure, Plain View Doctrine, Exigent Circumstances, Section 24(2) Exclusion of Evidence, Firearms Storage Regulations
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Evidence Law Firearms Regulation Careless Storage of Firearm Search and Seizure Plain View Doctrine Exigent Circumstances +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 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Jason Harvey

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial — Decision on Charter Application and Guilt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the rifle and ammunition were seized as a result of an unreasonable search and seizure and whether s.24(2) requires exclusion of the evidence
  2. 2 Whether the firearm was 'stored' within the meaning of s.86(1) Criminal Code
  3. 3 Whether the storage, if established, was careless (marked departure from standard of a reasonably prudent person)

Ratio Decidendi

The seizure was lawful: officers were legally on the property and the rifle was lawfully seized under the plain view doctrine and, alternatively, s.171.02(1) given exigent circumstances; the rifle was 'stored' because it was intentionally left out of the accused's immediate control for retrievable use later; the storage constituted a marked departure from the standard of a reasonable person (left visible in an unlocked vehicle with trigger lock key left in place and ammunition accessible), therefore conviction under s.86(1) is warranted.

Court Disposition

Guilty — convicted of careless storage of a firearm contrary to s.86(1) Criminal Code; conviction entered.

Orders

  • Convicted of careless storage contrary to s.86(1) Criminal Code; conviction entered (no sentence recorded in this decision)