R. v. Vanhorn

R. v. Vanhorn

Applying the Grant factors the court found the ITO contained material factual errors and misleading inferences about Health Canada licences that were critical to the warrant; the intrusion on the high privacy interest in the dwelling was significant; although there was no deliberate misleading, the affiant's premature and unreliable inferences rendered the state conduct serious enough that admission of the seized items would bring the administration of justice into disrepute; therefore the seized items are excluded under s.24(2).

Citation
2017 BCSC 379
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Jeffery James Vanhorn; Accused: Tanya Christensen
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Charter Application / Section 24(2) Exclusion Hearing Following S.8 Ruling
Outcome
Seized items excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter
Legal Topics
Warrant Validity, Reasonable Grounds, Exclusion of Evidence Under S.24(2), Expectation of Privacy in a Dwelling, Use of Ex Parte Information to Obtain, Medical Marihuana Licensing
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Search and Seizure Administrative Law (health Licensing) Warrant Validity Reasonable Grounds Exclusion of Evidence Under S.24(2) Expectation of Privacy in a Dwelling +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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Jeffery James Vanhorn

Accused

Tanya Christensen

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Charter Application / Section 24(2) Exclusion Hearing Following S.8 Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the search violated s.8 of the Charter due to an invalidly supported warrant
  2. 2 Whether items seized should be excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter
  3. 3 Whether the manner of entry (forced entry) rendered the search unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the Grant factors the court found the ITO contained material factual errors and misleading inferences about Health Canada licences that were critical to the warrant; the intrusion on the high privacy interest in the dwelling was significant; although there was no deliberate misleading, the affiant's premature and unreliable inferences rendered the state conduct serious enough that admission of the seized items would bring the administration of justice into disrepute; therefore the seized items are excluded under s.24(2).

Court Disposition

Seized items excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter

Orders

  • All items seized from 12720 Carr Street on April 30, 2013 are excluded from evidence at trial
  • Specifically excluded: the loaded 9mm Smith & Wesson handgun, two bulletproof vests and two rounds of ammunition