R. v. Ward

R. v. Ward

The court found a clear and deliberate breach of s.10(b): the police knowingly ignored the accused's repeated requests to consult counsel, continued to elicit incriminating evidence, and failed to facilitate alternative counsel while duty counsel was conflicted; the breach was serious and undermined the accused's protected interests, and under the Grant framework the statement must be excluded; therefore the videotaped statement was inadmissible.

Citation
2010 NSSC 3
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Matthew Ward; Accused: Shane Ward
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Voir Dire on Admissibility (pre Trial Decision)
Outcome
Statement by Shane Ward inadmissible and excluded from evidence
Legal Topics
S.10(b) Right to Counsel, S.24(2) Exclusion of Evidence, Voluntariness of Statements, Conflict of Interest for Duty Counsel, Self Incrimination, Grant Test for Exclusion
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Evidence Law Police Procedure Charter Litigation S.10(b) Right to Counsel S.24(2) Exclusion of Evidence Voluntariness of Statements +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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Matthew Ward

Accused

Shane Ward

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Voir Dire on Admissibility (pre Trial Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the police breached s.10(b) by failing to provide a reasonable opportunity to contact counsel
  2. 2 Whether the statement was voluntary
  3. 3 Whether duty counsel's conflict prevented meaningful implementation of s.10(b)

Ratio Decidendi

The court found a clear and deliberate breach of s.10(b): the police knowingly ignored the accused's repeated requests to consult counsel, continued to elicit incriminating evidence, and failed to facilitate alternative counsel while duty counsel was conflicted; the breach was serious and undermined the accused's protected interests, and under the Grant framework the statement must be excluded; therefore the videotaped statement was inadmissible.

Court Disposition

Statement by Shane Ward inadmissible and excluded from evidence

Orders

  • Exclude the videotaped and audio statement given by Shane Ward in the early morning hours of January 9, 2007 from the trial record