Class Notes (810,034)
Canada (493,928)
Greg Flynn (95)
Lecture 19

lecture 19.docx

4 Pages
Unlock Document

McMaster University
Political Science
Greg Flynn

Search a search by an officer of state for evidence Seizure taking off property that can be used as evidence It is an investigatory right The shift has been from property rights to private rights5 PrivacyR v Plant 1993 3 SCR 281a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the protection of personal information under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms The issue was whether the warrantless perimeter search of the accused home and the seizure of electricity consumption records violated the accuseds right against unreasonable search and seizure undersection 8 of the Charter The Court held that the seizure of consumption records 1was not in violation of section 8 but that the perimeter search did violate the CharterR v Buhay 2003 1 SCR 631 Mr Buhay had rented a locker in a Winnipeg bus station in which he stored a duffel bag of marijuana The smell from the bag attracted the attention of the security guards who had a station attendant open it for them They confirmed their suspicion of the contents of the bag then locked it back into the locker and called the police When the police arrived they had the attendant open the locker again They took the bagAt no time did anyone get a warrant to search the locker The police officers had testified that it did not cross their mind as they didnt think a locker had any right to privacy moreover they were doubtful there would be enough grounds for a warrantAt trial the judge found that the police violated section 8 of the Charter and excluded the evidence under section 242 The Court of Appeal overturned the acquittal on the basis that the locker was under the control of the stations security and there was no unlawful searchThe Supreme Court restored the trial judges acquittal finding that there was a violation of section 8 and the grounds were sufficient to exclude the evidenceR v Dersch 1993 3 SCR 768reasonable expectation of privacy In the evening of October 7 1987 Wilfred Dersch was driving near Duncan British Columbia His car swerved into oncoming traffic and caused an accident killing the other driver When the police arrived Dersch refused the breathalizer The police noticed that his eyes were glazed and he appeared intoxicated He was taken to the hospital where the doctor tried to give him an intravenous line which he resisted Eventually he passed out and the intravenous was given and a blood sample was taken The doctor tested the blood for alcohol content as it was necessary for treatmentThe police requested a blood sample from Dersche who refused The police then asked for the medical report which the doctor gave them It revealed that he was intoxicated at the time of treatment Later the police obtained a warrant to seize the blood sampleAt trial the judge found that there was no violation of section 8 as the blood sample was taken for medically necessary reasons The decision was upheld in the British Columbia Court of AppealThe issues before the Supreme Court were1whether the doctors and hospital were subject to the Charter
More Less

Related notes for POLSCI 3NN6

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.