R. v. Rapkin

R. v. Rapkin

Because the defence did not request review of the unredacted information, did not seek judicial summaries of redacted parts, and did not challenge the Crown's confidential informant claim, the case is indistinguishable from R. v. Blake and the appeal must be dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2010 ONCA 521
Parties
Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Miles Rapkin
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
S.24(2) Charter Remedy, Search Warrant, Confidential Informant, Exclusion of Evidence, Judicial Review of Warrant Materials
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Evidence S.24(2) Charter Remedy Search Warrant Confidential Informant Exclusion of Evidence Judicial Review of Warrant Materials

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

Miles Rapkin

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Appeal From Conviction (court of Appeal)

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge's refusal to review the unredacted information or to give the Crown an opportunity to justify the warrant deprived the appellant of an effective ability to challenge police conduct and vitiated the s.24(2) analysis
  2. 2 Whether this case is distinguishable from R. v. Blake

Ratio Decidendi

Because the defence did not request review of the unredacted information, did not seek judicial summaries of redacted parts, and did not challenge the Crown's confidential informant claim, the case is indistinguishable from R. v. Blake and the appeal must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.