CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES - Procedural rights - Protection against unreasonable search and seizure - Exclusion of evidence

Law360 Canada (October 4, 2022, 6:48 AM EDT) -- Appeal by the appellant from his conviction for first degree murder arising from a shooting incident. The appellant argued that the trial judge erred by admitting the contents of his cell phone seized in breach of his s. 10(b) Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter) rights. The appellant was a 16-year-old youth at the time of the event. The victim was shot in the street not far from the appellant’s home. The shooting was recorded on a cell phone, but it was impossible to identify the shooter from the video. The appellant’s cell phone was seized at the time of his arrest at his father’s home after he made a statement identifying it. From messages obtained from the appellant’s and the victim’s cell phones, as well as from Facebook records, it appeared the victim arranged to meet with the appellant to fight on the evening in question. They obtained information about the appellant’s devices and telephone numbers from his mother and, using this information, obtained a search warrant for her residence where the appellant resided to authorize the seizure of those devices. After a trial with a judge alone, the trial judge concluded, based on circumstantial evidence, that the appellant was the shooter. While the trial judge found a breach of s. 10(b) of the Charter, after a s. 24(2) analysis, he admitted the statement and the information derived from the cell phone....
LexisNexis® Research Solutions

Related Sections