R v Chang, 2017 ABQB 348

CourtCourt of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
JudgeHonourable Mr. Justice M. David Gates
Citation2017 ABQB 348
Date26 May 2017
Docket Number140032350Q1

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
7 practice notes
  • Right to Counsel: Implementational Obligations
    • Canada
    • Criminal Law Series Detention, Arrest and the Right to Counsel
    • September 19, 2024
    ...note 41 at para 9 (cited to ONCA); R v Shang En Wu , 2017 ONSC 1003 at para 78; Keshavarz , supra note 89 at paras 74, 78; R v Chang , 2017 ABQB 348 at paras 68-75, af ’d 2019 ABCA 315. 150 Lira , ibid . See also R v Patterson , 2006 BCCA 24 at paras 41, 42. 151 Rover , infra note 153 at pa......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Criminal Law Series Detention, Arrest and the Right to Counsel
    • September 19, 2024
    ...ONSC 8516, leave to appeal to ONCA refused, 2022 ONCA 241 ......................................................... 274 Chang , R v , 2017 ABQB 348, af ’d 2019 ABCA 315 ................................ 381 Channa , R v , 2022 ONSC 7153 ......................................... 378-79, 386 C......
  • Analyzing the Law of Police Dynamic Entry in Canada.
    • Canada
    • Queen's Law Journal Vol. 46 No. 1, September 2020
    • September 22, 2020
    ...the dynamic entry was not overwhelming. However, on balance, I am not prepared to find that it was unreasonable" (ibid at para 43). (60.) 2017 ABQB 348 [R v Chang (61.) See ibid at paras 8, 36. (62.) See ibid at paras 9-10, 13, 128. (63.) See ibid at paras 8-11, 13, 128. (64.) See ibid at p......
  • R v Chang
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • August 29, 2019
    ...of the Charter. On September 2, 2016, the trial judge dismissed the Charter applications; written reasons issued May 25, 2017: R v Chang, 2017 ABQB 348 [Chang No [7] Also on September 2, 2016, the appellant asked the trial judge to revisit his 11(b) decision in light of the July 8, 2016 iss......
  • Get Started for Free
4 cases
  • R v Chang
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • August 29, 2019
    ...of the Charter. On September 2, 2016, the trial judge dismissed the Charter applications; written reasons issued May 25, 2017: R v Chang, 2017 ABQB 348 [Chang No [7] Also on September 2, 2016, the appellant asked the trial judge to revisit his 11(b) decision in light of the July 8, 2016 iss......
  • R. v. Stone-Lacroix
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
    • September 29, 2017
    ...the accused an opportunity to contact counsel (see also R. v. Learning, 2010 ONSC 3816, [2010] O.J. No. 3092 (QL), and R. v. Chang, 2017 ABQB 348). [52] “Clearly in control” has been interpreted as “control of the premises to be searched, control of the firearms-related evidence to be seize......
  • R v Bailey
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • November 15, 2017
    ...the house to be searched and the people and the firearms within a relatively short period of time. Recently, Justice Gates in R v Chang, 2017 ABQB 348, discussed the meaning of “clearly in control” at para 64:The phrase “clearly in control” has been interpreted as “control of the premises t......
  • R. v. Deverze, 2022 ABPC 13
    • Canada
    • Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
    • January 18, 2022
    ...Underlying Delay in Access to Counsel [66]        Summary of principles as stated in R v Chang, 2017 ABQB 348: -       A delay in access to counsel constitutes a prima facie breach of Section 10(b) and shifts the burden to the......
3 books & journal articles
  • Right to Counsel: Implementational Obligations
    • Canada
    • Criminal Law Series Detention, Arrest and the Right to Counsel
    • September 19, 2024
    ...note 41 at para 9 (cited to ONCA); R v Shang En Wu , 2017 ONSC 1003 at para 78; Keshavarz , supra note 89 at paras 74, 78; R v Chang , 2017 ABQB 348 at paras 68-75, af ’d 2019 ABCA 315. 150 Lira , ibid . See also R v Patterson , 2006 BCCA 24 at paras 41, 42. 151 Rover , infra note 153 at pa......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Criminal Law Series Detention, Arrest and the Right to Counsel
    • September 19, 2024
    ...ONSC 8516, leave to appeal to ONCA refused, 2022 ONCA 241 ......................................................... 274 Chang , R v , 2017 ABQB 348, af ’d 2019 ABCA 315 ................................ 381 Channa , R v , 2022 ONSC 7153 ......................................... 378-79, 386 C......
  • Analyzing the Law of Police Dynamic Entry in Canada.
    • Canada
    • Queen's Law Journal Vol. 46 No. 1, September 2020
    • September 22, 2020
    ...the dynamic entry was not overwhelming. However, on balance, I am not prepared to find that it was unreasonable" (ibid at para 43). (60.) 2017 ABQB 348 [R v Chang (61.) See ibid at paras 8, 36. (62.) See ibid at paras 9-10, 13, 128. (63.) See ibid at paras 8-11, 13, 128. (64.) See ibid at p......