R. v. Lee

R. v. Lee

Viewed in context and in combination the affidavit (including Informant E's reliable information, prior surveillance, and two guarded intercepted calls, together with Ho's immediate meetings with known drug associates and movements) established a credibly based probability that intercepting Ho's communications would produce evidence of drug offences; therefore Authorization P37/2000 was valid as to Ho and Lee was properly named as a secondary target.

Citation
2002 BCSC 1931
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: See Chun Lee; Defendant: Chuk Fong Tao; Defendant: Wei Bo Chen; Defendant: Chak Nam Chan; Defendant: Siu Wah Chau; Defendant: Cheung Hung
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 October 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Authorization Challenge (wiretap/interception) / Ruling on Authorization (pre Trial)
Outcome
Authorization P37/2000 upheld as valid against Ho; Lee properly named as a secondary target; challenge dismissed.
Legal Topics
Interception Authorization, Informant Reliability, Reasonable and Probable Grounds, Drug Trafficking, Secondary Target Designation
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Search and Seizure Evidence Wiretap/interception Immigration Law Interception Authorization Informant Reliability Reasonable and Probable Grounds +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

See Chun Lee

Defendant

Chuk Fong Tao

Defendant

Wei Bo Chen

Defendant

Chak Nam Chan

Defendant

Siu Wah Chau

Defendant

Cheung Hung

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Authorization Challenge (wiretap/interception) / Ruling on Authorization (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Ho was properly named as a primary target in Authorization P37/2000
  2. 2 Whether the edited affidavit established a credibly based probability that interceptions of Ho would yield evidence of drug offences
  3. 3 Reliability assessment of informant evidence under Garofoli

Ratio Decidendi

Viewed in context and in combination the affidavit (including Informant E's reliable information, prior surveillance, and two guarded intercepted calls, together with Ho's immediate meetings with known drug associates and movements) established a credibly based probability that intercepting Ho's communications would produce evidence of drug offences; therefore Authorization P37/2000 was valid as to Ho and Lee was properly named as a secondary target.

Court Disposition

Authorization P37/2000 upheld as valid against Ho; Lee properly named as a secondary target; challenge dismissed.

Orders

  • Authorization P37/2000 is valid and is upheld as against Ho
  • Lee was properly named as a secondary target under P37/2000