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
The court dismissed a pre-trial stay application alleging abuse of process arising from police use of DNA phenotyping and kinship testing in the murder investigation.
The Court of Appeal for British Columbia dismissed Mr. Lawson’s appeal from an 18-month sentence and DNA order for tax evasion and counselling fraud.
The court dismissed a Charter challenge to the execution of a DNA warrant, holding the officers sufficiently informed the accused and no s. 8 breach was proved.
Sentencing reasons after guilty pleas to cannabis trafficking and electricity theft, with a joint sentence accepted, DNA and firearm orders made, and the victim fine surcharge waived.
The court granted the ex parte retrospective DNA collection order because the certificate of conviction established Bradford's 1975 murder conviction, making him eligible under s.487.055(1)(c); his expectation of privacy in identifying information is reduced; statutory limits on use of DNA profiles and criminal penalties mitigate privacy concerns; and procedural fairness did not require notice in this case, with conditions to be appended to protect dignity and access to counsel.
Source excerpt
Sentencing reasons after a retrial for cocaine and heroin trafficking in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside. The court imposed custody, a DNA order, forfeiture and a firearm ban.
Applying s.487.051(2) together with YCJA principles and the factors articulated in R. v. RC, the judge found that on the facts — a 14-year-old with no prior record who played a minor, impulsive role in a group assault and who credibly asserted real emotional and privacy concerns compounded by documented procedural lapses in DNA record protection — the impact of a primary DNA order on his privacy and security interests would be grossly disproportionate to the public interest; therefore a primary DNA order must be refused.
Source excerpt
Although there is a statutory presumption in favour of ordering DNA samples for primary designated offences, the offender may rebut that presumption by showing the interference is grossly disproportionate to the public interest; considering legislative purpose, limited intrusiveness, protections and case-specific factors, the court found that a momentary, non-premeditated bar fight by a first-time offender with no criminal record and low reoffending risk markedly differed from the offences contemplated by the scheme and that the intrusion on dignity and privacy outweighed the minimal public b…
Source excerpt
A 13-year-old guilty of assault with a weapon challenged a DNA data bank order. The Supreme Court restored the trial judge’s refusal to make the order.
The court held that 'more than one murder committed at different times' must be read by ordinary meaning to require murders that are distinguishable by time or by nature/quality; applying that meaning the murders in these two cases were not 'at different times' and the provincial judge's authorizations were properly quashed, so the Crown's appeal was dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
