R. v. Jacques (J.R.) and Mitchell (M.M.), (1996) 180 N.B.R.(2d) 161 (SCC)
Judge | Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, Iacobucci and Major, JJ. |
Court | Supreme Court (Canada) |
Case Date | February 02, 1996 |
Jurisdiction | Canada (Federal) |
Citations | (1996), 180 N.B.R.(2d) 161 (SCC);110 CCC (3d) 1;[1996] SCJ No 88 (QL);24 MVR (3d) 1;180 NBR (2d) 161;38 CRR (2d) 189;1 CR (5th) 229;JE 96-1946;65 ACWS (3d) 775;[1996] 3 SCR 312;458 APR 161;32 WCB (2d) 86;139 DLR (4th) 223;EYB 1996-67338;[1996] CarswellNB 469;202 NR 49;1996 CanLII 174 (SCC) |
R. v. Jacques (J.R.) (1996), 180 N.B.R.(2d) 161 (SCC);
180 R.N.-B.(2e) 161; 458 A.P.R. 161
MLB headnote and full text
[French language version follows English language version]
[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]
....................
Joseph Ronald Jacques and Mary Maurene Mitchell (appellants) v. Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Canada (respondent)
(24558)
Indexed As: R. v. Jacques (J.R.) and Mitchell (M.M.)
Supreme Court of Canada
Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, Iacobucci and Major, JJ.
October 3, 1996.
Summary:
The accused were charged with smuggling goods into Canada contrary to s. 160(b) of the Customs Act. At trial, after the Crown called its viva voce evidence, the Crown moved to admit into evidence certain articles which had been seized from the accused. Before the defence called any witnesses, it raised the argument that admission of the seized articles would render the trial of the accused unfair and would bring the administration of justice into disrepute contrary to s. 24(2) of the Charter.
The New Brunswick Provincial Court, in a decision reported at 143 N.B.R.(2d) 64; 366 A.P.R. 64, agreed with the defence argument and excluded the evidence. The court dismissed the charges. The Crown appealed.
The New Brunswick Court of Appeal allowed the appeals, set aside the verdicts and ordered new trials. The accused appealed.
The Supreme Court of Canada, Major and Sopinka, JJ.A., dissenting, dismissed the appeal.
Civil Rights - Topic 1217
Security of the person - Lawful or reasonable search - What constitutes unreasonable search and seizure - An R.C.M.P. officer learned of an unauthorized border crossing - He stopped a truck - After checking the driver's identification, the officer noticed shopping bags in the back - Without a caution, the officer questioned the driver who then allowed a search - The officer found goods and, suspecting smuggling, arrested the driver and passenger (the accused) and seized the items - The New Brunswick Court of Appeal observed that s. 99(1)(f) of the Customs Act permitted an officer to stop and search a vehicle if the officer suspected, on reasonable grounds, contravention of the Act or Regulations - Accordingly, the officer had not arbitrarily detained the accused and there was no unreasonable search and seizure - The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the decision - See paragraphs 1 to 23.
Civil Rights - Topic 3603
Detention and imprisonment - Detention - Arbitrary detention - What constitutes - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1217 ].
Criminal Law - Topic 4951
Appeals - Indictable offences - New trials - Grounds - Misdirection by trial judge - Appeal by Crown from acquittal - The accused were stopped by an R.C.M.P. officer near a border crossing - They were suspected of smuggling and were arrested - Their packages were seized - The trial judge erroneously found a violation of the accused's ss. 8 and 9 Charter rights and excluded the seized evidence under s. 24(2) - The Crown called no further evidence and the accused were acquitted - The Supreme Court of Canada ordered a new trial, finding that the verdict would not necessarily have been the same if the trial judge had not erred - The Crown's actions fell far short of an abuse of process, where the ruling on the voir dire rendered any other evidence virtually meaningless - See paragraphs 21 to 23.
Customs - Topic 3001
Search and seizure - General - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1217 ].
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Simmons, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 495; 89 N.R. 1; 30 O.A.C. 241; 66 C.R.(3d) 297; 45 C.C.C.(3d) 296; 38 C.R.R. 252; 18 C.E.R. 227; 55 D.L.R.(4th) 673, refd to. [paras. 7, 50].
Dehghani v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1993] 1 S.C.R. 1053; 150 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 8].
R. v. Bernshaw (N.), [1995] 1 S.C.R. 254; 176 N.R. 81; 53 B.C.A.C. 1; 87 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 9].
R. v. Hufsky, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 621; 84 N.R. 365; 27 O.A.C. 103; 40 C.C.C.(3d) 398; 63 C.R.(3d) 14; 4 M.V.R.(2d) 170; 32 C.R.R. 193, refd to. [paras. 10, 33].
R. v. Ladouceur, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1257; 108 N.R. 171; 40 O.A.C. 1; 77 C.R.(3d) 110; 56 C.C.C.(3d) 22; 21 M.V.R.(2d) 165, refd to. [paras. 10, 33].
R. v. Simpson (R.) (1993), 60 O.A.C. 327; 12 O.R.(3d) 182 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 13, 41].
R. v. Marin, [1994] O.J. No. 1280 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 14].
R. v. Montour (T.S.) and Longboat (S.B.) (1992), 129 N.B.R.(2d) 361; 325 A.P.R. 361 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [paras. 17, 40].
R. v. Wilson, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1291; 108 N.R. 207; 107 A.R. 321; 56 C.C.C.(3d) 142, refd to. [para. 18].
R. v. Collins, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 265; 74 N.R. 276; 56 C.R.(3d) 193; [1987] 3 W.W.R. 699; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 508; 33 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 28 C.R.R. 122; 13 B.C.L.R.(2d) 1, refd to. [paras. 20, 56].
R. v. Power (E.), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 601; 165 N.R. 241; 117 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 269; 365 A.P.R. 269, refd to. [paras. 21, 76].
R. v. Montour (T.S.) and Longboat (S.B.) (1992), 129 N.B.R.(2d) 361; 325 A.P.R. 361 (Prov. Ct.), revd. (1994), 150 N.B.R.(2d) 7; 385 A.P.R. 7 (C.A.), revd. [1995] 2 S.C.R. 416; 182 N.R. 154; 163 N.B.R.(2d) 158; 419 A.P.R. 158, refd to. [para. 40].
Southam Inc. v. Hunter, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 145; 55 N.R. 241; 55 A.R. 291; 9 C.R.R. 355; 14 C.C.C.(3d) 97; 41 C.R.(3d) 97; [1984] 6 W.W.R. 577; 33 Alta. L.R.(2d) 193; 27 B.L.R. 297; 84 D.T.C. 6467; 2 C.P.R.(3d) 1; 11 D.L.R.(4th) 641, refd to. [para. 56].
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. 58].
R. v. Duguay, Murphy and Sevigny, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 93; 91 N.R. 201; 31 O.A.C. 177, refd to. [para. 60].
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, refd to. [para. 61].
R. v. Vézeau, [1977] 2 S.C.R. 277; 8 N.R. 235; 28 C.C.C.(2d) 81, refd to. [para. 70].
R. v. Morin, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 345; 88 N.R. 161; 30 O.A.C. 181; 44 C.C.C.(3d) 193; 66 C.R.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 70].
Statutes Noticed:
Customs Act, R.S.C. 1985 (2nd Supp.), c. 1, sect. 11(1), sect. 99(1)(f), sect. 159 [para. 25].
Counsel:
Norville T. Getty, for the appellants;
S.R. Fainstein, Q.C., and Theodore K. Tax, for the respondent.
Solicitors of Record:
Norville T. Getty, Fredericton, New Brunswick, for the appellants;
Attorney General of Canada, Halifax, Nova Scotia, for the respondent.
This appeal was heard on February 2, 1996, before Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, Iacobucci and Major, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada. On October 3, 1996, the judgment of the court was delivered and the following opinions were filed:
Gonthier, J. (Cory and Iacobucci, JJ., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 23;
Major, J., dissenting - see paragraphs 24 to 67;
Sopinka, J., dissenting - see paragraphs 68 to 78.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
R. v. Baker (D.F.), 2004 ABPC 218
...(1998), 108 B.C.A.C. 244; 176 W.A.C. 244; 126 C.C.C.(3d) 298 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 64]. R. v. Jacques (J.R.) and Mitchell (M.M.), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 312; 202 N.R. 49; 180 N.B.R.(2d) 161; 458 A.P.R. 161, refd to. [para. 66]. R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103; 65 N.R. 87; 14 O.A.C. 335, refd to......
-
Can v. Calgary Chief of Police et al.,
...R. v. Roks (A.) (2011), 281 O.A.C. 235; 2011 ONCA 526, refd to. [para. 164, footnote 122]. R. v. Jacques (J.R.) and Mitchell (M.M.), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 312; 202 N.R. 49; 180 N.B.R.(2d) 161; 458 A.P.R. 161, refd to. [para. 166, footnote Lister v. Perryman (1870), L.R. 4 H.L. 521, refd to. [para......
-
R. v. Golden, [2001] 3 SCR 679
...96 C.C.C. 97; Re Laporte and The Queen (1972), 8 C.C.C. (2d) 343; Reynen v. Antonenko (1975), 20 C.C.C. (2d) 342; R. v. Jacques, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 312; R. v. Morrison (1987), 35 C.C.C. (3d) 437; R. v. Ferguson (1990), 1 C.R. (4th) 53; R. v. Flintoff (1998), 16 C.R. (5th) 248; R. v. Stott, [19......
-
R. v. Monney (I.), (1997) 105 O.A.C. 1 (CA)
...215 ; 152 Sask.R. 1 ; 140 W.A.C. 1 ; 112 C.C.C.(3d) 193 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 28]. R. v. Jacques (J.R.) and Mitchell (M.M.), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 312; 202 N.R. 49 ; 180 N.B.R.(2d) 161 ; 458 A.P.R. 161 ; 110 C.C.C.(3d) 1 , refd to. [paras. 32, 146]. R. v. Simmons, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 495......
-
R. v. Baker (D.F.), 2004 ABPC 218
...(1998), 108 B.C.A.C. 244; 176 W.A.C. 244; 126 C.C.C.(3d) 298 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 64]. R. v. Jacques (J.R.) and Mitchell (M.M.), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 312; 202 N.R. 49; 180 N.B.R.(2d) 161; 458 A.P.R. 161, refd to. [para. 66]. R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103; 65 N.R. 87; 14 O.A.C. 335, refd to......
-
R. v. Golden, [2001] 3 SCR 679
...96 C.C.C. 97; Re Laporte and The Queen (1972), 8 C.C.C. (2d) 343; Reynen v. Antonenko (1975), 20 C.C.C. (2d) 342; R. v. Jacques, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 312; R. v. Morrison (1987), 35 C.C.C. (3d) 437; R. v. Ferguson (1990), 1 C.R. (4th) 53; R. v. Flintoff (1998), 16 C.R. (5th) 248; R. v. Stott, [19......
-
R. v. Monney (I.), (1997) 105 O.A.C. 1 (CA)
...215 ; 152 Sask.R. 1 ; 140 W.A.C. 1 ; 112 C.C.C.(3d) 193 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 28]. R. v. Jacques (J.R.) and Mitchell (M.M.), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 312; 202 N.R. 49 ; 180 N.B.R.(2d) 161 ; 458 A.P.R. 161 ; 110 C.C.C.(3d) 1 , refd to. [paras. 32, 146]. R. v. Simmons, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 495......
-
R. v. Jackpine (R.), (2006) 347 N.R. 201 (SCC)
...32]. R. v. Simmons, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 495; 89 N.R. 1; 30 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 35]. R. v. Jacques (J.R.) and Mitchell (M.M.), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 312; 202 N.R. 49; 180 N.B.R.(2d) 161; 458 A.P.R. 161, refd to. [para. R. v. Monney (I.), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 652; 237 N.R. 157; 119 O.A.C. 272, refd ......
-
Table of cases
...SCR 314, 113 CCC (3d) 1, [1997] SCJ No 21 ..........................................................526, 528, 529, 531, 578 R v Jacques, [1996] 3 SCR 312, 110 CCC (3d) 1, [1996] SCJ No 88 .................. 185 R v JAH (1998), 105 BCAC 259, 124 CCC (3d) 221, [1998] BCJ No 725 (CA) ...............
-
Table of cases
...SCC 52 ................176, 189 R v Jacquard, [1997] 1 SCR 314, 113 CCC (3d) 1, 4 CR (5th) 280 .................... 350 R v Jacques, [1996] 3 SCR 312, 110 CCC (3d) 1, 1 CR (5th) 229 .........................37 R v James, [1971] 1 OR 661, 2 CCC (2d) 141 (CA) .......................................
-
Nature of the Interaction Between Police and Individuals
...of a person, is necessary to prevent the carrying out of the terrorist activity. 334 Storrey , above note 278 at 249. 335 R v Jacques , [1996] 3 SCR 312 at para 20 [ Jacques ], quoting R v Bernshaw , [1995] 1 SCR 254 at 304–6. Nature of the Interaction Between Police and Individuals 91 The ......
-
Powers of Detention
...s. 98(1) of the Customs Act . 78 Ibid at para 42. 79 Simmons , above note 73 at para 48, Dickson J, cited with approval in R v Jacques , [1996] 3 SCR 312 at para 18, Gonthier J, and in Monney , above note 74 at para 42. 80 Simmons , above note 73 at paras 27–28. Powers of Detention 137 One ......