R. v. C.L.M., (2000) 191 Sask.R. 290 (QB)

• Judge: Baynton, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: March 16, 2000
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2000), 191 Sask.R. 290 (QB);2000 SKQB 118

R. v. C.L.M. (2000), 191 Sask.R. 290 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] Sask.R. TBEd. MR.090

Her Majesty The Queen v. C.L.M.

(1999 Q.B.J. No. 40; 2000 SKQB 118)

Indexed As: R. v. C.L.M.

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Baynton, J.

March 16, 2000.

Summary:

The accused young person was charged with second degree murder. The Crown sought a ruling that a videotaped statement taken by the police from the accused was admissible in evidence. Defence counsel maintained that the statement was not obtained in compliance with s. 56(2) of the Young Offenders Act.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench ruled that s. 56(2) had not been complied with and that the videotaped statement was inadmissible.

Criminal Law - Topic 5347

Evidence and witnesses - Confessions and voluntary statements - Young offenders - The accused young person was charged with second degree murder - After she was arrested she was advised of her rights under s. 56(2) of the Young Offenders Act to consult a parent or other adult and to have such a person present when she gave a statement - The accused spoke to a legal aid lawyer, but wanted to speak to her mother, an uncle or aunt, or a stepfather - The police advised that none of those people could be reached by telephone and asked the accused what she wanted them to do - The accused did not answer the ques­tion, but began to tell them about coming into the City the previous evening - The police began to ask her questions which elicited answers - After several minutes, the accused asked to call her mother and the officers left the room - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that the accused did not clearly waive her right to consult with a parent or other adult under s. 56(2) and that the statement obtained from her was not admissible.

Criminal Law - Topic 5347

Evidence and witnesses - Confessions and voluntary statements - Young offenders - The accused young person was charged with second degree murder - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench ruled that a videotaped statement taken by the police from the accused was not admis­sible - The statement was not obtained in compliance with s. 56(2) of the Young Offenders Act where the police failed to give the accused a reasonable opportunity to consult a parent or other adult and to have that person present when she gave her statement - While the police genuinely believed that they had complied with the requirements of s. 56(2) and that the accused had effectively waived her rights to consult a parent or other adult, s. 56(2) required compliance on an objective rather that a subjective standard of reasonableness - It was not sufficient that the police in good faith believed that their efforts consti­tuted reasonable compliance - See para­graph 3.

Criminal Law - Topic 8719

Young offenders - General principles - Procedure - Waiver of statutory rights - [See both Criminal Law - Topic 5347 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 8845

Young offenders - Evidence and proof - Admissibility of evidence obtained con­trary to Young Offenders Act - [See both Criminal Law - Topic 5347 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. C.R.M. (1998), 165 Sask.R. 95 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. L.R.I. and E.T., [1993] 4 S.C.R. 504; 159 N.R. 363; 37 B.C.A.C. 48; 60 W.A.C. 48, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. J.T.J., Jr., [1990] 2 S.C.R. 755; 112 N.R. 321; 70 Man.R.(2d) 81, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. J.L.S. (1995), 162 A.R. 388; 83 W.A.C. 388; 97 C.C.C.(3d) 20 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Statutes Noticed:

Young Offenders Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. Y-1, sect. 56(2) [para. 1].

Counsel:

R.D. Ritter, for the Crown;

B.M. Singer, Q.C., for the accused.

This voir dire was heard before Baynton, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following decision on March 16, 2000.