R. v. Cater

R. v. Cater

Arrest of Kyle Cater was lawful on January 15, 2009; the seizure of his Samsung cell phone was a lawful search incident to that arrest; on these facts the delayed forensic analysis conducted by qualified personnel without a warrant did not violate s.8 because the device was an unsophisticated non-smart phone, seized in a Part VI wiretap investigation, processed according to best practices, and the search was truly incidental to the arrest; alternatively, even if a technical breach occurred the s.24(2) factors weigh against exclusion of the evidence.

Citation
2012 NSPC 2
Parties
Crown/prosecution: Her Majesty The Queen; Accused/defendant: Kyle Cater
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Weapons Possession and Trafficking; Charter S.8 Voir Dire / Pre Trial Charter Application/voir Dire on Validity of Search
Outcome
Defence application dismissed; search found constitutional and phone contents admissible
Legal Topics
Search Incident to Arrest, Warrantless Forensic Search of Cell Phone, Reasonable Expectation of Privacy, Charter S.8, Charter S.24(2) Exclusion, Part VI Wiretap Context, Best Practices in Digital Forensics
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Evidence Privacy/search and Seizure Telecommunications Law Search Incident to Arrest Warrantless Forensic Search of Cell Phone Reasonable Expectation of Privacy +4 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 7 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty The Queen

Crown/prosecution

Kyle Cater

Accused/defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Weapons Possession and Trafficking; Charter S.8 Voir Dire / Pre Trial Charter Application/voir Dire on Validity of Search

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did police have lawful grounds to arrest Kyle Cater on January 15, 2009?
  2. 2 Did the search incident to that arrest lawfully extend to seizure of his cell phone?
  3. 3 Was a forensic analysis of the seized cell phone without a warrant a breach of s.8?

Ratio Decidendi

Arrest of Kyle Cater was lawful on January 15, 2009; the seizure of his Samsung cell phone was a lawful search incident to that arrest; on these facts the delayed forensic analysis conducted by qualified personnel without a warrant did not violate s.8 because the device was an unsophisticated non-smart phone, seized in a Part VI wiretap investigation, processed according to best practices, and the search was truly incidental to the arrest; alternatively, even if a technical breach occurred the s.24(2) factors weigh against exclusion of the evidence.

Court Disposition

Defence application dismissed; search found constitutional and phone contents admissible

Orders

  • Charter s.8 application dismissed
  • Contents of the Samsung cell phone as forensically extracted are admissible at trial