R. v. Hodgson (G.A.), (1998) 230 A.R. 18 (QB)

• Judge: Lee, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: January 07, 1998
• Citations: (1998), 230 A.R. 18 (QB)

R. v. Hodgson (G.A.) (1998), 230 A.R. 18 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1998] A.R. TBEd. MR.015

Her Majesty The Queen v. George Arthur Hodgson

(accused)

Indexed As: R. v. Hodgson (G.A.)

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Lee, J.

February 20, 1998.

Summary:

The accused was charged with two offen­ces under the Food and Drugs Act and three offences under the Narcotic Control Act. A voir dire was held to determine the admissi­bility of statements made by the accused to a police officer during the execution of a search warrant.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the statements were admissible.

Civil Rights - Topic 4612

Right to counsel - General - Waiver or abandonment of - The police (including Boyer) executed a search warrant issued under the Narcotic Control Act at Hodgson's business premises - Boyer read Hodgson his Charter rights and cautioned him - Hodgson stated that he would talk to a lawyer later - Talwin and Ritalin were found - Boyer informed Hodgson that he would be charged - Boyer did not give Hodgson another s. 10(b) Charter warning - Boyer took Hodgson outside for a ciga­rette - Boyer attempted to solicit general drug and drug supplier information - At trial, Hodgson submitted that his state­ments to Boyer should be excluded because his s. 10(b) Charter right to coun­sel had been breached - The Crown sub­mitted that Hodgson had waived his right to consult counsel - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that Hodgson had waived his right to speak to counsel - See para­graphs 64 to 73.

Civil Rights - Topic 4617

Right to counsel - General - Notice of - General - Seven police officers (including Boyer) executed a search warrant issued under the Narcotic Control Act at Hodgson's business premises - After Hodgson was handcuffed, Boyer read him his Charter rights and gave a caution - Hodgson stated that he would talk to a lawyer later - Talwin and Ritalin were found - Boyer informed Hodgson that he would be charged - Boyer did not give Hodgson another s. 10(b) Charter warning - Boyer took Hodgson outside for a ciga­rette - Boyer attempted to solicit general drug and drug supplier information - At trial, Hodgson submitted that his s. 10(b) Charter right to counsel had been breached because Boyer failed to reiterate his right to consult counsel after the narcotics were found - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the statements were ad­missible - See paragraphs 75 to 87.

Criminal Law - Topic 5355

Evidence and witnesses - Confessions and voluntary statements - Whether statement was made freely and voluntarily - The police (including Boyer) executed a search warrant issued under the Narcotic Control Act at Hodgson's business premises - Boyer read Hodgson his Charter rights and cautioned him - Talwin and Ritalin were found - Boyer informed Hodgson that he would be charged - Boyer did not give Hodgson another s. 10(b) Charter warning - Boyer took Hodgson outside for a ciga­rette - Boyer attempted to solicit general drug and drug supplier information - Boyer made notes of the conversation in point form - At trial, Hodgson submitted that his state­ments to Boyer should be excluded because Boyer's notes were insufficiently detailed to establish that the statements were made voluntarily - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the Boyer's notes were adequate - See paragraphs 30 to 51.

Criminal Law - Topic 5355

Evidence and witnesses - Confessions and voluntary statements - Whether statement was made freely and voluntarily - The police executed a search warrant issued under the Narcotic Control Act at Hodgson's business premises - Boyer read Hodgson his Charter rights and cautioned him - Talwin and Ritalin were found - Boyer informed Hodgson that he would be charged - Boyer did not give Hodgson another s. 10(b) Charter warning - Boyer took Hodgson outside for a cigarette - Boyer attempted to solicit general drug and drug supplier information - Boyer made notes of the conversation in point form - At trial, Hodgson submitted that his state­ments to Boyer should be excluded because Boyer's notes were insufficiently detailed to establish that the statements were made voluntarily without threats or induce­ments - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the statements were volun­tary - See paragraphs 51 to 63.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Belanger (1987), 40 C.C.C.(2d) 335 (Ont. H.C.), dist. [para. 35].

R. v. Duplante (1983), 10 W.C.B. 260 (Ont. Prov. Ct.), dist. [para. 37].

R. v. Kelly (1981), 5 W.C.B. 462 (Ont. Prov. Ct.), dist. [para. 38].

R. v. Smith (1981), 60 C.C.C.(2d) 327 (Que. S.C.), dist. [para. 39].

R. v. Arndt, Brooks, Harvey and Stefiuk (1981), 11 Man.R.(2d) 389; 61 C.C.C.(2d) 268 (Co. Ct.), dist. [para. 40].

R. v. Hagans, [1994] 5 C.M.A.R. 206 (Ct. Martial App. Bd.), dist. [para. 41].

R. v. Richards (D.B.) (1997), 87 B.C.A.C. 21; 143 W.A.C. 21; 6 C.R.(5th) 154 (C.A.), consd. [para. 43].

R. v. Buckley (1980), 4 W.C.B. 401 (Man. C.A.), folld. [para. 45].

R. v. White, [1994] O.J. No. 1698 (Ont. Gen. Div.), folld. [para. 46].

R. v. J.J.J., [1994] A.J. No. 620 (Alta. Prov. Ct.), consd. [para. 47].

R. v. Legere (1988), 89 N.B.R.(2d) 361; 226 A.P.R. 361; 43 C.C.C.(3d) 502 (C.A.), folld. [para. 48].

Director of Public Prosecutions v. Ping Lin, [1976] A.C. 574 (H.L.), consd. [para. 52].

R. v. Manninen, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 1233; 76 N.R. 198; 21 O.A.C. 192; 34 C.C.C.(3d) 385, consd. [para. 64].

R. v. Baig, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 537; 81 N.R. 87; 25 O.A.C. 81; 37 C.C.C.(3d) 181; 61 C.R.(3d) 97, refd to. [para. 65].

R. v. Smith (J.L.), [1989] 2 S.C.R. 368; 99 N.R. 372; 39 B.C.L.R.(2d) 145; [1989] 6 W.W.R. 289, refd to. [para. 65].

R. v. Clarkson, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 383; 66 N.R. 114; 69 N.B.R.(2d) 40; 177 A.P.R. 40; 25 C.C.C.(3d) 207, refd to. [para. 66].

R. v. Allison, [1984] B.C.J. No. 1743 (B.C. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 68].

R. v. Meston (G.) (1995), 175 A.R. 161 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 68].

R. v. R.R.A. (1991), 98 Sask.R. 168 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 68].

R. v. Black, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 138; 98 N.R. 281; 93 N.S.R.(2d) 35; 242 A.P.R. 35; 50 C.C.C.(3d) 1, dist. [para. 75].

R. v. Evans (W.G.), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 869; 124 N.R. 278; 63 C.C.C.(3d) 289, dist. [para. 76].

R. v. Smith (N.M.), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 714; 122 N.R. 203; 104 N.S.R.(2d) 233; 283 A.P.R. 233; 63 C.C.C.(3d) 313, refd to. [para. 78].

R. v. Borden (J.R.), [1994] 3 S.C.R. 145; 171 N.R. 1; 134 N.S.R.(2d) 321; 383 A.P.R. 321; 92 C.C.C.(3d) 404, refd to. [para. 78].

R. v. Whittle (D.J.), [1994] 2 S.C.R. 914; 170 N.R. 16; 73 O.A.C. 201; 116 D.L.R.(4th) 416; 92 C.C.C.(3d) 11, refd to. [para. 78].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 10(b) [para. 27]; sect. 24(2) [para. 29].

Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27, sect. 15, sect. 39(2) [para. 1].

Narcotic Control Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-1, sect. 3(1), sect. 4(2), sect. 19.1(2)(B) [para. 1]; sect. 42 [para. 14].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Kaufman, Fred, Admissibility of Confes­sions (3rd Ed. 1979) (1997 Supp.), pp. 59, 139 [para. 30].

McWilliams, Peter, K., Admissions and Confessions (3rd Ed. 1997), generally [para. 58].

Counsel:

R.I. Macdonald (Justice Canada), for the Crown;

Peter Royal, Q.C., for the accused.

This voir dire was held on January 7, 1998, by Lee, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, who filed the following decision on February 20, 1998.