R. v. Byrne (R.G.), (2015) 471 Sask.R. 82 (QB)

• Judge: Megaw, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: April 16, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2015), 471 Sask.R. 82 (QB);2015 SKQB 111

R. v. Byrne (R.G.) (2015), 471 Sask.R. 82 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] Sask.R. TBEd. AP.047

Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Robert Gordon Byrne (respondent)

(2014 CRIM No. 37; 2015 SKQB 111)

Indexed As: R. v. Byrne (R.G.)

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Yorkton

Megaw, J.

April 16, 2015.

Summary:

The accused was charged with impaired driving and driving while over .08. The accused alleged a breach of s. 9 of the Charter.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court, in a decision reported at (2014), 455 Sask.R.112, found that the accused's s. 9 Charter right was breached as he had been arbitrarily detained. The court excluded the evidence of the accused's physical condition pursuant to s. 24(2) of the Charter. The accused was found not guilty of both charges. The Crown appealed.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the appeal.

Civil Rights - Topic 3603

Detention and imprisonment - Detention - What constitutes arbitrary detention - [See first Police - Topic 3109 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 3604

Detention and imprisonment - Detention - What constitutes detention - [See first Police - Topic 3109 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8368

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Exclusion of evidence - [See first Police - Topic 3109 ].

Police - Topic 3109

Powers - Investigation - Motor vehicles - An RCMP officer was patrolling a parking lot of a Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan mine - The officer understood the RCMP had been asked to patrol the parking lot to provide a police presence - The officer followed a vehicle being operated by Byrne for a short period - He entered Byrne's plate number into his computer - Given a mistake made in entering the number, the computer indicated that the plate had expired - Byrne parked in a parking stall and exited his vehicle - The officer called out to Byrne, saying "Hey, buddy, your plates are expired" - Byrne responded by saying that was incorrect - Byrne returned to his vehicle and the officer told him not to enter the vehicle - The officer parked his police cruiser behind Byrne's vehicle - Byrne's vehicle would have been unable to exit the parking stall - Byrne and the officer engaged in a further discussion - The officer noticed what may have been signs of impairment - He arrested Byrne for impaired driving and made a breath demand - Byrne was charged with impaired driving and driving while over .08 - The trial judge found that Byrne had been arbitrarily detained in breach of s. 9 of the Charter - The trial judge excluded the evidence of Byrne's physical condition pursuant to s. 24(2) of the Charter - Byrne was acquitted - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the Crown's appeal - The court agreed with the trial judge's determination that Byrne had been detained - Further, the trial judge's finding that the officer's primary purpose for attending to and entering the parking lot was for a traffic safety purpose to enforce the Traffic Safety Act was supported by the evidence - Section 209.1 of the Act authorized police officers to detain a driver for a specific highway traffic safety requirement under the Act - The Act prohibited an unregistered vehicle from operating on a highway - Highway did not include a privately owned parking lot - In the result, there was nothing in the Act which suggested Byrne was committing a specific highway traffic safety violation pursuant to the Act - It followed that the detention was without authority and was arbitrary pursuant to s. 9 of the Charter - The trial judge's analysis with respect to s. 24(2) of the Charter was brief - He determined that the breach was serious and would bring the administration of justice into disrepute - The determination pursuant to s. 24(2) was within the potential decisions available and the trial judge did not proceed on any wrong principle - See paragraphs 26 to 59.

Police - Topic 3109

Powers - Investigation - Motor vehicles - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench stated that R. v. Lux (2012 SKCA) was not authority to suggest the Traffic Safety Act could not be enforced in parking lots - A police officer was entitled to an investigation for a specific highway traffic safety violation - There was no such violation in this case - See paragraph 47.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Helm (B.E.) (2011), 368 Sask.R. 115; 2011 SKQB 32, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Kratchmer (L.D.) (2012), 392 Sask.R. 262; 2012 SKQB 117, refd to. [para. 15].

Housen v. Nikolaisen et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235; 286 N.R. 1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1; 2002 SCC 33, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Grant (D.), [2009] 2 S.C.R. 353; 391 N.R. 1; 253 O.A.C. 124; 2009 SCC 32, refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Papilion (J.) (2014), 438 Sask.R. 37; 608 W.A.C. 37; 311 C.C.C.(3d) 423; 2014 SKCA 45, refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Lux (L.) (2012), 405 Sask.R. 214; 563 W.A.C. 214; 295 C.C.C.(3d) 236; 2012 SKCA 129, consd. [para. 23].

R. v. Hebrada-Walters (J.P.) (2013), 409 Sask.R. 229; 568 W.A.C. 229; 2013 SKCA 24, refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Turpin (G.S.J.) (2012), 393 Sask.R. 184; 546 W.A.C. 184; 284 C.C.C.(3d) 296; 2012 SKCA 50, refd to. [para. 55].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 9, sect. 24(2) [para. 2].

Traffic Safety Act, R.S.S. 2004, c. T-18.1, sect. 209.1 [para. 26].

Counsel:

Andrew Wyatt, for the Crown;

Barry Nychuk, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard before Megaw, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Yorkton, who delivered the following judgment on April 16, 2015.