Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Charter of Rights - Criminal law - Arbitrary detention - Search and seizure - Evidence - Exclusion - Whether the arrest and search in question were lawful - Whether the evidence obtained as a result of the search should be excluded pursuant to s. 24(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

When a police officer stopped the appellant for speeding, he noticed a smell of marijuana coming from the vehicle. When the appellant failed to produce a driver’s licence and provided a false name, the officer invited him to move into the police vehicle for an identity check. For safety reasons, the officer did a pat down search of the appellant before allowing him to enter the police vehicle, and in doing so, he discovered over five thousand dollars in cash on the appellant’s person. The appellant then admitted to having lied about his identity, and provided the officer with a second false name. After issuing the appellant a speeding ticket under the second name, the officer arrested him for possession of marijuana and notified him that he was going to conduct a search of his vehicle. During the search, the officer discovered 100 grams of cocaine. The appellant then identified himself by his real name. At trial, the judge ruled that the officer had reasonable grounds under s. 495(1)(a) of the Criminal Code for the arrest and the search, and that there was therefore no breach of the appellant’s Charter rights. The trial judge also explained that even if there had been a Charter breach, she would have admitted the evidence. The appellant was convicted of possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. The majority of the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Berger J.A., dissenting, would have allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction and entered an acquittal. In his view, there were no reasonable grounds to arrest the appellant for possession of marijuana or to search his vehicle for other drugs that resulted in the seizure of the cocaine. Berger J.A. would have excluded the evidence pursuant to s. 24(2) of the Charter.