R. v. Downey

R. v. Downey

Although officers subjectively believed the accused was a trespasser and believed arrest under the Protection of Property Act was justified, a reasonable person in the officers' position would not have concluded arrest was necessary to prevent continuation or repetition of the trespass because the accused was in the process of leaving the school and had not shown an intent to remain or imminently breach the peace; therefore the arrest was not objectively reasonable, was unlawful, ancillary powers did not apply, and the accused was entitled to resist — resulting in acquittal of resisting-arrest and assault charges.

Citation
2009 NSPC 25
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: La'Quoya Downey
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Decision (provincial Court)
Outcome
Acquitted
Legal Topics
Lawful Arrest, Trespass, Resisting Arrest, Assault on Police, Protection of Property Act, Ancillary Powers of Arrest, Breach of the Peace, Reasonable and Probable Grounds
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Police Powers Education Law Lawful Arrest Trespass Resisting Arrest Assault on Police Protection of Property Act +3 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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

La'Quoya Downey

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Decision (provincial Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arrest of the accused was lawful under the Protection of Property Act
  2. 2 Whether police could lawfully effect the arrest using ancillary common law powers to prevent an apprehended breach of the peace
  3. 3 Whether the accused's resistance and any force used constituted offences given lawfulness of arrest

Ratio Decidendi

Although officers subjectively believed the accused was a trespasser and believed arrest under the Protection of Property Act was justified, a reasonable person in the officers' position would not have concluded arrest was necessary to prevent continuation or repetition of the trespass because the accused was in the process of leaving the school and had not shown an intent to remain or imminently breach the peace; therefore the arrest was not objectively reasonable, was unlawful, ancillary powers did not apply, and the accused was entitled to resist — resulting in acquittal of resisting-arrest and assault charges.

Court Disposition

Acquitted

Orders

  • La'Quoya Downey acquitted of charges of resisting arrest and of assaulting police officers; Crown had earlier indicated it was not seeking a conviction on the charge of assaulting Cst. Gena Hill