R. v. DeWolfe

R. v. DeWolfe

The Information to Obtain met the minimal threshold to authorize a warrant executable "at any time" due to urgency, counter-surveillance, officer safety and preservation of evidence, but the actual no-knock hard-entry executed without reassessment, without a female officer present, and without adequate regard for the presence of children was unreasonable and violated s.8; given the seriousness of the breach and its effect on the administration of justice the evidence seized was excluded under s.24(2).

Citation
2006 NSPC 51
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused/applicant: Christopher Lee DeWolfe
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Controlled Drugs and Substances Act; Charter S.8 Application / Pre Trial Application for Declaration of S.8 Breach and Exclusion of Evidence Under S.24(2)
Outcome
Court found a s.8 Charter breach in the manner of entry and ordered exclusion of the seized evidence under s.24(2)
Legal Topics
Search Warrant Issuance, No Knock Entry, Knock and Notice Rule, Reasonable Expectation of Privacy, Exclusion of Evidence Under S.24(2), Police Practice and Discretion, Children and Privacy in Searches
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Search and Seizure Search Warrant Issuance No Knock Entry Knock and Notice Rule Reasonable Expectation of Privacy Exclusion of Evidence Under S.24(2) +2 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Christopher Lee DeWolfe

Accused/applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Controlled Drugs and Substances Act; Charter S.8 Application / Pre Trial Application for Declaration of S.8 Breach and Exclusion of Evidence Under S.24(2)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Information to Obtain provided sufficient grounds to authorize a search warrant executable "at any time"," at night"," or whether the warrant was deficient
  2. 2 Whether the police violated the common-law knock/notice rule by conducting a no-knock hard-entry search and thereby breached s.8 of the Charter
  3. 3 Whether the evidence seized should be excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter given the manner of the search

Ratio Decidendi

The Information to Obtain met the minimal threshold to authorize a warrant executable "at any time" due to urgency, counter-surveillance, officer safety and preservation of evidence, but the actual no-knock hard-entry executed without reassessment, without a female officer present, and without adequate regard for the presence of children was unreasonable and violated s.8; given the seriousness of the breach and its effect on the administration of justice the evidence seized was excluded under s.24(2).

Court Disposition

Court found a s.8 Charter breach in the manner of entry and ordered exclusion of the seized evidence under s.24(2)

Orders

  • Evidence seized at 2408 Adams Avenue on January 27, 2004 (26.26 grams of cocaine, scales, $680 and related items) is excluded from the trial pursuant to s.24(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms