R. v. Dunbar

R. v. Dunbar

The arrest was lawful because the arresting officer had a genuine subjective belief and, objectively, a reasonable officer could rely on the confidential informant’s direct-observation tip combined with police knowledge of the accused; therefore the search incidental to that lawful arrest did not breach s.8 and the seized drugs were admissible.

Citation
2008 NSPC 39
Parties
Prosecution: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Ronald Dunbar
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal — Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and Criminal Code / Charter Application — S.8 Challenge to Search Incidental to Arrest
Outcome
Application to exclude evidence dismissed; arrest and search found lawful; no s.8 Charter violation
Legal Topics
Lawful Arrest, Reasonable and Probable Grounds, Informant Reliability, Search Incidental to Arrest, Exclusion of Evidence Under S.24(2)
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Charter (search and Seizure) Evidence Lawful Arrest Reasonable and Probable Grounds Informant Reliability Search Incidental to Arrest Exclusion of Evidence Under S.24(2)

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 7 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Prosecution

Ronald Dunbar

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal — Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and Criminal Code / Charter Application — S.8 Challenge to Search Incidental to Arrest

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether officers had reasonable and probable grounds to arrest without a warrant
  2. 2 Whether the confidential informant’s tip was sufficiently reliable to ground an arrest
  3. 3 Whether the search incidental to arrest violated s.8 of the Charter

Ratio Decidendi

The arrest was lawful because the arresting officer had a genuine subjective belief and, objectively, a reasonable officer could rely on the confidential informant’s direct-observation tip combined with police knowledge of the accused; therefore the search incidental to that lawful arrest did not breach s.8 and the seized drugs were admissible.

Court Disposition

Application to exclude evidence dismissed; arrest and search found lawful; no s.8 Charter violation

Orders

  • Application to exclude evidence under s.24(2) dismissed