R. v. Hill

R. v. Hill

The court held that the police failed to adequately inform Mr. Hill of his s.10(b) rights (duty counsel and Legal Aid), that this breach causally produced self‑conscripted breathalyzer evidence, and that admission of that evidence would render the trial unfair and bring the administration of justice into disrepute under s.24(2); therefore the breathalyzer results are excluded despite the officer's good faith.

Citation
2003 NSPC 56
Parties
Prosecution: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Michael Andrew Hill
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Impaired Operation (breathalyzer) / Voir Dire (pre Trial Admissibility Hearing)
Outcome
Breathalyzer evidence excluded
Legal Topics
S.10(b) Right to Counsel, S.24(2) Exclusion of Evidence, Breathalyzer Admissibility, Duty Counsel and Legal Aid
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law (charter) Evidence Law S.10(b) Right to Counsel S.24(2) Exclusion of Evidence Breathalyzer Admissibility Duty Counsel and Legal Aid

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Prosecution

Michael Andrew Hill

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Impaired Operation (breathalyzer) / Voir Dire (pre Trial Admissibility Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether police adequately informed the detainee of s.10(b) rights including duty counsel and Legal Aid
  2. 2 Whether the failure to inform causally produced self‑incriminating breathalyzer evidence
  3. 3 Whether the breathalyzer evidence must be excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the police failed to adequately inform Mr. Hill of his s.10(b) rights (duty counsel and Legal Aid), that this breach causally produced self‑conscripted breathalyzer evidence, and that admission of that evidence would render the trial unfair and bring the administration of justice into disrepute under s.24(2); therefore the breathalyzer results are excluded despite the officer's good faith.

Court Disposition

Breathalyzer evidence excluded

Orders

  • Breathalyzer samples and analysis excluded from evidence under s.24(2) of the Charter