R. v. Lee et al.

R. v. Lee et al.

On the edited, excised and amplified record (including the entirety of P14/98 and cross-examined portions of P47/98), the combined informant information, surveillance and intercepted communications created a credibly based probability that Lee and Ho were engaged in ongoing importation/trafficking activity; therefore authorization P54/98 was properly granted as to both accused and interceptions made thereunder are admissible.

Citation
2002 BCSC 15
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: See Chun Lee; Accused: Gou Din Ho; Accused: Chuk Fong Tao; Accused: Wei Bo Chen; Accused: Chak Nam Chan; Accused: Siu Wan Chau; Accused: Cheung Hung
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 January 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Wiretap Authorization Review / Voir Dire Review of Authorization P54/98
Outcome
Authorization P54/98 held valid as to See Chun Lee and Gou Din Ho; interceptions pursuant to P54/98 admissible
Legal Topics
Wiretap Authorization, Informant Reliability, Reasonable and Probable Grounds, Amplification of Affidavit, Surveillance Corroboration, Admissibility of Intercepted Communications
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Search and Seizure Wiretap/interception Controlled Substances Law Wiretap Authorization Informant Reliability Reasonable and Probable Grounds +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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

See Chun Lee

Accused

Gou Din Ho

Accused

Chuk Fong Tao

Accused

Wei Bo Chen

Accused

Chak Nam Chan

Accused

Siu Wan Chau

Accused

Cheung Hung

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Wiretap Authorization Review / Voir Dire Review of Authorization P54/98

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether authorization P54/98 was valid insofar as it authorized interception of private communications of See Chun Lee and Gou Din Ho as primary targets
  2. 2 Whether portions of prior affidavits and cross-examination (P14/98 and parts of P47/98) may be treated as amplification of the record on review
  3. 3 Whether evidence elicited in one accused's cross-examination may be used in another accused's application within a single voir dire

Ratio Decidendi

On the edited, excised and amplified record (including the entirety of P14/98 and cross-examined portions of P47/98), the combined informant information, surveillance and intercepted communications created a credibly based probability that Lee and Ho were engaged in ongoing importation/trafficking activity; therefore authorization P54/98 was properly granted as to both accused and interceptions made thereunder are admissible.

Court Disposition

Authorization P54/98 held valid as to See Chun Lee and Gou Din Ho; interceptions pursuant to P54/98 admissible

Orders

  • Authorization P54/98 upheld as valid in respect of See Chun Lee and Gou Din Ho
  • Interceptions conducted under Authorization P54/98 declared admissible