R. v. Buhay (M.A.), (2003) 177 Man.R.(2d) 72 (SCC)
Judge | McLachlin, C.J.C., Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour, LeBel and Deschamps, JJ. |
Court | Supreme Court (Canada) |
Case Date | June 05, 2003 |
Jurisdiction | Canada (Federal) |
Citations | (2003), 177 Man.R.(2d) 72 (SCC);2003 SCC 30;305 NR 158;174 CCC (3d) 97;122 ACWS (3d) 863;107 CRR (2d) 240;JE 2003-1124;177 Man R (2d) 72;304 WAC 72;225 DLR (4th) 624;[2003] SCJ No 30 (QL);AZ-50177805;[2003] 1 SCR 631;10 CR (6th) 205;[2004] 4 WWR 1;57 WCB (2d) 206;[2003] ACS no 30 |
R. v. Buhay (M.A.) (2003), 177 Man.R.(2d) 72 (SCC);
304 W.A.C. 72
MLB headnote and full text
[French language version follows English language version]
[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]
....................
Temp. Cite: [2003] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. JN.001
Mervyn Allen Buhay (appellant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) and Attorney General of Quebec (intervener)
(28667; 2003 SCC 30; 2003 CSC 30)
Indexed As: R. v. Buhay (M.A.)
Supreme Court of Canada
McLachlin, C.J.C., Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour, LeBel and Deschamps, JJ.
June 5, 2003.
Summary:
Buhay was charged with unlawful possession of marijuana for the purposes of trafficking. He applied for exclusion of evidence under s. 24(2) of the Charter on the basis that his right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure (Charter, s. 8) was violated.
The Manitoba Provincial Court, in a decision reported 147 Man.R.(2d) 149, allowed the application. The Crown appealed.
The Manitoba Court of Appeal, in a decision reported 156 Man.R.(2d) 111; 246 W.A.C. 111, allowed the appeal. The court held that there was no Charter violation and remitted the matter to the Provincial court for sentencing. Buhay appealed.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and restored the Provincial Court's decision.
Civil Rights - Topic 1508
Property - General principles - Expectation of privacy - The Supreme Court of Canada held that the protections of s. 8 of the Charter (security against unreasonable search or seizure) extended to the objects that a person stored and locked in a bus depot locker - A reasonable person would expect that his or her private belongings, when secured in a locker that he or she paid money to rent, would be left alone, unless the contents appeared to pose a threat to the security of the bus depot - Unless an emergency or other exigent circumstances arose, locker renters could reasonably expect that their lockers would be free from unauthorized search by bus terminal security agents or the police - See paragraphs 18 to 24.
Civil Rights - Topic 1508
Property - General principles - Expectation of privacy - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1646 ].
Civil Rights - Topic 1646
Property - Search and seizure - Unreasonable search and seizure defined - Two police officers, responding to a call by Winnipeg bus terminal security guards, searched, seized and took away marijuana that had been stored in a rented locker - As a result, Buhay was charged with possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking - The officers never obtained a search warrant - The idea had not crossed their minds - Buhay argued that the search and seizure was unreasonable (Charter, s. 8) and sought exclusion of the evidence obtained as a result (Charter, s. 24(2)) - The trial judge agreed with Buhay and allowed the application - With respect to s. 24(2), the trial judge said that the s. 8 violation was serious and not simply technical and that he was concerned at the police's casual approach in infringing Buhay's rights here - The trial judge ruled that admission of the marijuana here would cause greater disrepute to the justice system than its exclusion would - The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the decision where, (a), with respect to s. 8: (1) there were no exigent circumstances; (2) the marijuana was not in plain view; and (3) the warrantless search and seizure was an impermissible intrusion of the state on a legitimate and reasonable expectation of privacy; and, (b), with respect to s. 24(2), the trial judge's conclusions were reasonable.
Civil Rights - Topic 1650
Property - Search and seizure - Warrantless search and seizure - Plain view doctrine - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1646 ].
Civil Rights - Topic 1650.3
Property - Search and seizure - Warrantless search and seizure - Exigent circumstances - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1646 ].
Civil Rights - Topic 8311
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - General - Application - Nongovernmental or private interference - Winnipeg bus terminal security guards searched a storage locker after smelling marijuana - The Supreme Court of Canada agreed with lower court rulings that there was no Charter violation since the security guards were private actors and were not agents of the state - See paragraphs 25 to 31.
Civil Rights - Topic 8368
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Exclusion of evidence - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1646 ].
Civil Rights - Topic 8380.5
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Appeals - The Supreme Court of Canada discussed the principles applicable to appellate review of a trial judge's decision to exclude or admit evidence following a breach of the Charter - See paragraphs 41 to 48.
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Fitch (E.R.) (1994), 47 B.C.A.C. 154; 76 W.A.C. 154 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].
R. v. M.R.M., [1998] 3 S.C.R. 393; 233 N.R. 1; 171 N.S.R.(2d) 125; 519 A.P.R. 125, refd to. [para. 10].
R. v. Collins, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 265; 74 N.R. 276; 33 C.C.C.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 11].
R. v. Edwards (C.), [1996] 1 S.C.R. 128; 192 N.R. 81; 88 O.A.C. 321, refd to. [para. 12].
Southam Inc. v. Hunter, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 145; 55 N.R. 241; 55 A.R. 291, refd to. [para. 18].
R. v. Wong et al., [1990] 3 S.C.R. 36; 120 N.R. 34; 45 O.A.C. 250, refd to. [para. 18].
R. v. Dinh (H.T.) et al. (2001), 284 A.R. 304; 42 C.R.(5th) 318 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 21].
R. v. Mercer and Kenny (1992), 52 O.A.C. 70; 70 C.C.C.(3d) 180 (C.A.), consd. [para. 23].
R. v. Law - see R. v. 2821109 Canada Inc. et al.
R. v. 2821109 Canada Inc. et al., [2002] 1 S.C.R. 227; 281 N.R. 267; 245 N.B.R.(2d) 270; 636 A.P.R. 270, consd. [para. 24].
Eldridge et al. v. British Columbia (Attorney General) et al., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 624; 218 N.R. 161; 96 B.C.A.C. 81; 155 W.A.C. 81, consd. [para. 25].
R. v. Broyles, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 595; 131 N.R. 118; 120 A.R. 189; 8 W.A.C. 189, consd. [para. 25].
R. v. Caucci (1995), 43 C.R.(4th) 403 (Que. C.A.), refd to. [para. 30].
McKinney v. University of Guelph, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 229; 118 N.R. 1; 45 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 31].
R. v. Dyment, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 417; 89 N.R. 249; 73 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 13; 229 A.P.R. 13, refd to. [para. 33].
R. v. Colarusso, [1994] 1 S.C.R. 20; 162 N.R. 321; 69 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 34].
R. v. Grant (D.), [1993] 3 S.C.R. 223; 159 N.R. 161; 35 B.C.A.C. 1; 57 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 35].
R. v. Kokesch, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 3; 121 N.R. 161, refd to. [para. 36].
Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971), 403 U.S. 443, refd to. [para. 37].
R. v. Spindloe (M.) (2001), 207 Sask.R. 3; 247 W.A.C. 3; 154 C.C.C.(3d) 8 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 37].
R. v. Belliveau and Losier (1986), 75 N.B.R.(2d) 18; 188 A.P.R. 18 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 37].
R. v. Nielsen (1988), 66 Sask.R. 293; 43 C.C.C.(3d) 548 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 37].
R. v. Kouyas (S.) (1994), 136 N.S.R.(2d) 195; 388 A.P.R. 195 (C.A.), affd. [1996] 1 S.C.R. 70; 192 N.R. 36; 148 N.S.R.(2d) 159; 429 A.P.R. 159, refd to. [para. 37].
R. v. Fitt (S.E.) (1995), 139 N.S.R.(2d) 186; 397 A.P.R. 186; 96 C.C.C.(3d) 341 (C.A.), affd. [1996] 1 S.C.R. 70; 192 N.R. 38; 148 N.S.R.(2d) 399; 429 A.P.R. 399, refd to. [para. 37].
Texas v. Brown (1983), 460 U.S. 730, refd to. [para. 37].
R. v. Rothman, [1981] 1 S.C.R. 640; 35 N.R. 485, refd to. [para. 40].
R. v. Oickle (R.F.), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 3; 259 N.R. 227; 187 N.S.R.(2d) 201; 585 A.P.R. 201, refd to. [para. 40].
R. v. Harrer (H.M.), [1995] 3 S.C.R. 562; 186 N.R. 329; 64 B.C.A.C. 161; 105 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 40].
R. v. Therens, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 613; 59 N.R. 122; 40 Sask.R. 122; 18 D.L.R.(4th) 655; [1985] 4 W.W.R. 286, refd to. [para. 42].
R. v. C.R.B., [1990] 1 S.C.R. 717; 107 N.R. 241; 109 A.R. 81, refd to. [para. 44].
R. v. Duguay, Murphy and Sevigny, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 93; 91 N.R. 201; 31 O.A.C. 177, refd to. [para. 44].
R. v. Greffe, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 755; 107 N.R. 1; 107 A.R. 1, refd to. [para. 44].
R. v. Mellenthin, [1992] 3 S.C.R. 615; 144 N.R. 50; 135 A.R. 1; 33 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 44].
R. v. Wise, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 527; 133 N.R. 161; 51 O.A.C. 351, refd to. [para. 44].
R. v. Goncalves (H.M.), [1993] 2 S.C.R. 3; 150 N.R. 384; 135 A.R. 397; 33 W.A.C. 397, refd to. [para. 44].
R. v. Belnavis (A.) and Lawrence (C.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 341; 216 N.R. 161; 103 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 44].
R. v. Stillman (W.W.D.), [1997] 1 S.C.R. 607; 209 N.R. 81; 185 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 472 A.P.R. 1, refd to. [para. 44].
Housen v. Nikolaisen et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235; 286 N.R. 1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1, consd. [para. 45].
R. v. Evans (C.R.) et al., [1996] 1 S.C.R. 8; 191 N.R. 327; 69 B.C.A.C. 81; 113 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 50].
R. v. Silveira (A.), [1995] 2 S.C.R. 297; 181 N.R. 161; 81 O.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 52].
R. v. Caslake (T.L.), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 51; 221 N.R. 281; 123 Man.R.(2d) 208; 159 W.A.C. 208, refd to. [para. 52].
R. v. Sheppard (C.), [2002] 1 S.C.R. 869; 284 N.R. 342; 211 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 50; 633 A.P.R. 50, consd. [para. 54].
R. v. Strachan, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 980; 90 N.R. 273, refd to. [para. 63].
R. v. Feeney (M.), [1997] 2 S.C.R. 13; 212 N.R. 83; 91 B.C.A.C. 1; 148 W.A.C. 1, consd. [para. 63].
R. v. Sieben, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 295; 74 N.R. 271, refd to. [para. 65].
R. v. Jacoy, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 548; 89 N.R. 61, refd to. [para. 65].
R. v. Sanelli, Duarte and Fasciano, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 30; 103 N.R. 86; 37 O.A.C. 322, refd to. [para. 65].
R. v. Fasciano - see R. v. Sanelli, Duarte and Fasciano.
R. v. Duarte - see R. v. Sanelli, Duarte and Fasciano.
R. v. Burlingham (T.W.), [1995] 2 S.C.R. 206; 181 N.R. 1; 58 B.C.A.C. 161; 96 W.A.C. 161, consd. [para. 70].
R. v. Simmons, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 495; 89 N.R. 1; 30 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 73].
R. v. Kitaitchik (A.) (2002), 161 O.A.C. 169 (C.A.), consd. [para. 73].
Statutes Noticed:
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 8, sect. 24(2), sect. 32(1) [para. 15].
Private Investigators and Security Guards Act, R.S.M. 1987, c. P-132; C.C.S.M., c. P-132, sect. 1, sect. 35 [para. 15].
Authors and Works Noticed:
Paciocco, David M., and Stuesser, Lee, The Law of Evidence (3rd Ed. 2002), p. 276 [para. 44].
Sopinka, John, Lederman, Sidney M., and Bryant, Alan W., The Law of Evidence in Canada (2nd Ed. 1999), pp. 30 to 33, 339 to 340 [para. 40]; 423 [para. 44]; 450 [para. 59].
Counsel:
Bruce F. Bonney and G. Bruce Gammon, for the appellant;
David G. Frayer, Q.C., and Erin E. Magas, for the respondent;
Written submissions only by Carole Lebeuf, for the intervener.
Solicitors of Record:
Phillips, Aiello, Winnipeg, Manitoba, for the appellant;
The Attorney General of Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba, for the respondent;
The Attorney General's Prosecutor, Montréal, Quebec, for the intervener.
This appeal was heard on November 1, 2002, by McLachlin, C.J.C., Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel and Deschamps, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada.
The judgment of the Supreme Court was delivered in both official languages by Arbour, J., on June 5, 2003.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
R. v. Grant (D.), (2009) 391 N.R. 1 (SCC)
...N.R. 161; 19 Q.A.C. 163, refd to. [para. 75]. R. v. Kokesch, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 3; 121 N.R. 161, refd to. [para. 75]. R. v. Buhay (M.A.), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 631; 305 N.R. 158; 177 Man.R.(2d) 72; 304 W.A.C. 72; 2003 SCC 30, refd to. [para. 75]. R. v. White (J.K.), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 417; 240 N.R. 1; ......
-
R. v. Baker (D.F.), 2004 ABPC 218
...refd to. [para. 159]. R. v. Kokesch (1990), 121 N.R. 161; 61 C.C.C.(3d) 207 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 159]. R. v. Buhay (M.A.) (2003), 305 N.R. 158; 177 Man.R.(2d) 72; 304 W.A.C. 72 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. R. v. Harris and Lighthouse Video Centres Ltd. (1987), 20 O.A.C. 26; 35 C.C.C.(3d) ......
-
R. v. Sattar (F.H.), (2008) 443 A.R. 349 (PC)
...2 S.C.R. 463; 198 N.R. 321; 92 O.A.C. 161; 136 D.L.R.(4th) 502; 107 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [paras. 101, 131]. R. v. Buhay (M.A.), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 631; 305 N.R. 158; 177 Man.R.(2d) 72; 304 W.A.C. 72; 225 D.L.R.(4th) 624; 174 C.C.C.(3d) 97, refd to. [paras. 107, R. v. Belnavis (A.) and Lawr......
-
R. v. Orbanski (C.); R. v. Elias (D.J.), (2005) 335 N.R. 342 (SCC)
...N.B.R.(2d) 270; 636 A.P.R. 270; 2002 SCC 10, refd to. [para. 93]. R. v. Law - see R. v. 2821109 Canada Inc. et al. R. v. Buhay (M.A.), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 631; 305 N.R. 158; 177 Man.R.(2d) 72; 304 W.A.C. 72; 2003 SCC 30, refd to. [para. R. v. Harrer (H.M.), [1995] 3 S.C.R. 562; 186 N.R. 329; 64......
-
R. v. Baker (D.F.), 2004 ABPC 218
...refd to. [para. 159]. R. v. Kokesch (1990), 121 N.R. 161; 61 C.C.C.(3d) 207 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 159]. R. v. Buhay (M.A.) (2003), 305 N.R. 158; 177 Man.R.(2d) 72; 304 W.A.C. 72 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. R. v. Harris and Lighthouse Video Centres Ltd. (1987), 20 O.A.C. 26; 35 C.C.C.(3d) ......
-
R. v. Sattar (F.H.), (2008) 443 A.R. 349 (PC)
...2 S.C.R. 463; 198 N.R. 321; 92 O.A.C. 161; 136 D.L.R.(4th) 502; 107 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [paras. 101, 131]. R. v. Buhay (M.A.), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 631; 305 N.R. 158; 177 Man.R.(2d) 72; 304 W.A.C. 72; 225 D.L.R.(4th) 624; 174 C.C.C.(3d) 97, refd to. [paras. 107, R. v. Belnavis (A.) and Lawr......
-
R. v. Nguyen (H.Q.) et al., (2008) 324 Sask.R. 1 (CA)
...(C.A.), refd to. [para. 38]. R. v. Harris (G.C.) (2005), 260 Sask.R. 156; 2005 SKQB 111, refd to. [paras. 41, 66]. R. v. Buhay (M.A.), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 631; 305 N.R. 158; 177 Man.R.(2d) 72; 304 W.A.C. 72; 2003 SCC 30, refd to. [paras. 48, 75]. R. v. Duguay, Murphy and Sevigny (1985), 8 O.A.C......
-
R. v. White,
...R. v. Pino, 2016 ONCA 389; R. v. Kossick, 2018 SKCA 55; R. v. Yakubovsky-Rositsan, 2010 ONCA 748; R. v. Adler, 2020 ONCA 246; R. v. Buhay, 2003 SCC 30; R. v. Paterson, 2017 SCC 15; R. v. James, 2019 ONCA 288; R. v. Omar, 2018 ONCA 975, aff’d 2019 SCC 32; Charter of Rights and Freedom......
-
Court Of Appeal Summaries (October 7 October 11 2019)
...Halpern v Canada (Attorney General), (2003) 65 OR (3d) 161 (CA), Edwards v Canada (Attorney General), [1930] 1 DLR 98 (PC), R v Buhay, 2003 SCC 30, Eldridge v British Columbia (Attorney General), [1997] 3 SCR 624, McKinney v University of Guelph, [1990] 3 SCR 229, M v H, [1999] 2 SCR 3, Mir......
-
Ontario Court Of Appeal Summaries (June 5 9, 2017)
...for the Purpose of Trafficking, Assault, Citizen's Arrest, Police Conduct, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss 8, 9, R v Buhay, 2003 SCC 30, R v Reid, 2016 ONCA 524 R v French, 2017 ONCA 460 [Feldman, MacPherson and Benotto JJ.A.] Counsel: David French, acting in person J.R. Presser......
-
US Supreme Court Clarifies Law On Warrantless Cell Phone Searches. Will The Supreme Court Of Canada Follow?
...also recognized the importance of informational privacy: R. v. Dyment, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 417; R. v. Plant, [1993] 3 S.C.R. 281; R. v. Buhay, 2003 SCC 30, [2003] 1 S.C.R. 631 at para. 24; R. v. Morelli, 2010 S.C.C. 8 at paras. 3, 105-106, [2010] 1 S.C.R. Will the Court follow the approach of t......
-
Digest: R v McMahon, 2018 SKCA 26
...SKPC 106, 133 WCB (2d) 19 R v Borden, [1994] 3 SCR 145, 119 DLR (4th) 74, 134 NSR (2d) 321, 92 CCC (3d) 404, 33 CR (4th) 147 R v Buhay, 2003 SCC 30, [2003] 1 SCR 631, 305 NR 158, 225 DLR (4th) 624, 177 Man R (2d) 72, 174 CCC (3d) 97, 10 CR (6th) 205 R v Campbell, 2003 MBCA 76, [2004] 1 WWR ......
-
Table of cases
...aff’d (2000), 46 OR (3d) 481, 142 CCC (3d) 225, [2000] OJ No 72 (CA) .............................................57, 315 R v Buhay, [2003] 1 SCR 631, 174 CCC (3d) 97, 2003 SCC 30 ...............23, 76, 567 R v Burgar, 2013 BCPC 389 ................................................................
-
Improperly Obtained Evidence
...said that section 24(2) is not intended to punish illegal police conduct. 19 For more than two decades, the jurisprudence 17 R v Buhay , [2003] 1 SCR 631 at para 70 [ Buhay ], quoting Collins , above note 4 at 208. 18 Burlingham , above note 7 at para 25; Buhay , above note 17 at para 71. 1......
-
Nature of the Interaction Between Police and Individuals
...in discovering evidence. See also R v Sidhu , 2013 ONCA 719, where the accused’s wife was found not to be a state agent. 322 R v Buhay , 2003 SCC 30 [ Buhay ]. 323 Ibid at para 28, quoting Eldridge v British Columbia (AG) , [1997] 3 SCR 624 at para 43. 324 Buhay , above note 322 at para 30.......