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
Ont. C.A. considered whether a mistaken-identity arrest was lawful, and whether drugs and a gun found on the appellant should be excluded under s. 24(2).
Voir dire on strip searches and counsel rights: the court found s. 8 and s. 10(b) Charter breaches, and reserved the s. 24(2) exclusion issue.
The court found no Charter breach on the initial search or delay to counsel, but held the undercover controlled delivery exceeded the implied licence to knock and breached s. 8.
The deliberate operational decision to delay the appellant's access to counsel until after searches produced a serious s.10(b) breach whose impact on the appellant's security of the person and dignity outweighed society's interest in admission of the reliable, probative evidence; applying Grant the seized handgun and cash were excluded under s.24(2), convictions overturned and acquittals entered.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed appeals in a Charter abuse-of-process case, holding that all appellants had standing but remitting the matter for new hearings.
The court dismissed a Charter voir dire seeking exclusion of videos from SD cards, finding no s. 10(b) breach and no overbroad warrant.
The court dismissed an accused’s disclosure request for RCMP CCTV policies and related records, holding they were not likely relevant to the narrow s. 10(b) Charter issue.
The court held that police arbitrarily detained the accused from the outset, then unlawfully searched and delayed access to counsel, establishing Charter breaches.
The court concluded a reasonable person in the appellant’s position was psychologically detained when the police blocked his car and approached it; that detention occurred before formal arrest and the police failed to advise the appellant of his s.10(b) rights immediately. Applying the Grant factors, the combined breaches of ss.9 and 10(b) were serious and had a significant impact, and exclusion under s.24(2) was required, so the evidence discovered must be excluded and the convictions cannot stand.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal upheld Sung Hwan Choi’s conviction for trafficking-related possession, holding a booking-in waistband inspection was not a strip search and the verdict was reasonable.
Explore more
