Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Appeal dismissed. The Court of Appeal held the arresting officer had objectively reasonable and probable grounds, so there was no ss. 8 or 9 Charter breach.
Charter voir dire in R. v. Hill: the court found s. 8 breaches in searches of bags in a vehicle, but admitted the evidence under s. 24(2).
The trial judge erred in finding the Debot factors supported reasonable and probable grounds; the anonymous tip was not credible, compelling, or meaningfully corroborated and factual errors undermined the corroboration analysis, so the arrest breached s.9 and the searches breached s.8; applying the Grant factors the serious police misconduct and profound impact on Charter rights required exclusion of the evidence, therefore the convictions were set aside and acquittals entered.
Source excerpt
The court ruled on a Vukelich application in a criminal warrant challenge, granting limited cross-examination of the affiant, denying sub-affiant cross-examination, and excising prejudicial and unsupported ITO material.
The arrest of the accused and companions lacked objectively reasonable and probable grounds; the ensuing search revealed marijuana but was unreasonable under ss.8 and 9 of the Charter; balancing under s.24(2) (Grant) found police conduct reckless, the breach significantly impaired Charter interests, and given the minor nature of the offence admission would bring the administration of justice into disrepute — the marijuana evidence is therefore excluded.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held a warrantless perimeter search of a residence violated s. 8, but upheld the later warrant and refused to exclude the evidence under s. 24(2).
Explore more
