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 Tyler Jackson’s appeal, holding the seatbelt stop was lawful and the vehicle search was supported by reasonable grounds under cannabis legislation.
The court dismissed a s. 24(2) Charter application to exclude trunk evidence after finding multiple police breaches, holding admission would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
Voir dire on whether cellphone data from Mr. Pham’s arrest should be excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter. The court held the breaches were inadvertent and admitted the evidence.
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 Court of Appeal set aside drug-trafficking convictions after finding an unlawful warrantless home entry and ruling the trial judge erred in admitting the evidence under s. 24(2).
Police had reasonable and probable grounds to conduct a strip search but conducted it in a manner that violated s.8 (Golden requirements breached); police deliberately delayed implementation of s.10(b) counsel-of-choice for 1 hour 42 minutes tied to execution of the search warrant, constituting a serious s.10(b) breach; the temporal and contextual link between that breach and the evidence seized makes the evidence 'obtained in a manner' of a Charter violation and, balancing Grant factors, admission would bring the administration of justice into disrepute, therefore the seized evidence is excl…
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal for British Columbia dismissed Michael Heatley’s appeal, upholding the admission of confessions and vehicle-search evidence.
The court found no Charter breach because rights were read shortly before hospital transfer and no legal obligation existed to re‑read them, the police were passive custodians and did not request bodily samples, the packages were voluntarily excreted and there was little expectation of privacy, and therefore the evidence was admissible and the Charter application dismissed.
Source excerpt
The ITO accurately described Mr. Litt's observations and the confirming photograph; the failure to state that information reached police via Mr. Litt's employee was immaterial to the reliability of the information and did not constitute a breach of s.8, so exclusion under s.24(2) was not required; appeal dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal found no error of law: the trial judge correctly exercised her discretion in refusing a s.24(1) stay because the cumulative circumstances provided objective reasonable and probable grounds for the strip search under R. v. Golden, the breach did not produce irreparable prejudice to trial fairness or to the integrity of the justice system, and therefore leave to appeal was properly dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
