R. v. Calder

R. v. Calder

The court held that officers need not specify the precise physical location of the listening device beyond stating it was 'in the cab'; the voir dire was adjourned and left open to allow further evidence or argument, particularly regarding the poor audio quality of the recording.

Citation
2001 BCSC 1777
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Randy Kendall Calder
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 November 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Voir Dire (adjourned)
Outcome
Voir dire adjourned; description 'in the cab' accepted as sufficient; further evidence permitted on audio quality.
Legal Topics
Listening Device Location, Admissibility of Audio Evidence, Audio Recording Quality, Voir Dire, Undercover Operations
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Criminal Procedure Listening Device Location Admissibility of Audio Evidence Audio Recording Quality Voir Dire Undercover Operations

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Randy Kendall Calder

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Voir Dire (adjourned)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether officers must specify the exact location of a listening device installed in a truck cab
  2. 2 Whether the description 'in the cab' is sufficient for defence purposes
  3. 3 Whether explanation/evidence is required to address poor quality of the audio recording

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that officers need not specify the precise physical location of the listening device beyond stating it was 'in the cab'; the voir dire was adjourned and left open to allow further evidence or argument, particularly regarding the poor audio quality of the recording.

Court Disposition

Voir dire adjourned; description 'in the cab' accepted as sufficient; further evidence permitted on audio quality.

Orders

  • Officers to testify that the listening device was 'in the cab' (sufficient description for defence).
  • Voir dire adjourned and kept open for further evidence or argument.