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 of Appeal dismissed a Charter appeal, holding that a 1 hour and 47 minute roadside detention for a narcotics dog search was not arbitrary under s. 9.
The court upheld a protective pat-down during a dropped 911 call response, found no s. 8 or s. 9 breach, and dismissed the accused’s Charter application.
The court found a pretextual vehicle stop, unlawful downstream searches, delayed Charter warnings, and excessive force, excluding the firearms under s. 24(2).
Charter voir dire on impaired-driving charges; the court found multiple breaches of ss. 7, 8, 9 and 10 arising from roadside detention, ASD delay, search, arrest, detention conditions, and lost video.
The court held the traffic stop was lawful but found Charter breaches in delayed notice of detention reasons and an unjustified delay in access to counsel.
The Supreme Court of Canada restored a firearms conviction, holding the trial judge did not err in the s. 24(2) exclusion analysis and that the firearm was discoverable.
The conviction is maintained because the totality of the circumstances, including a corroborated confidential informant tip and police observations at a bus station, provided reasonable suspicion for an investigative detention; the pat-down and search of the satchel worn on the person were lawful officer-safety measures under s.8; the trial judge's Grant error was not outcome-determinative because discoverability was properly considered under the second branch and admission of the firearm did not bring the administration of justice into disrepute; the sentencing reliance on the informant tip…
Source excerpt
The court partly granted a Charter application in a criminal matter, finding breaches tied to release on an appearance notice, a drug-investigation shift, and an unlawful trafficking arrest.
Le tribunal conclut à plusieurs violations de la Charte lors de l’exécution de mandats: détention initiale valide, mais fouilles, photos, détention prolongée et saisie du téléphone illégales.
The Court upheld the trial judge's findings that the officer had reasonable and subjectively held grounds to detain and arrest the appellant, the pat-down and search of the satchel were justified for officer safety and as incident to arrest/investigative detention, the six-minute delay in advising s.10(b) was a minor breach whose impact was minimal and did not merit exclusion under s.24(2), and there was no evidentiary basis for a finding of racial profiling.
Source excerpt
Explore more
