R. v. Jones (T.), 2016 ONCA 543
| Judge | MacPherson, MacFarland and LaForme, JJ.A. |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Ontario) |
| Case Date | July 08, 2016 |
| Jurisdiction | Ontario |
| Citations | 2016 ONCA 543;(2016), 350 O.A.C. 274 (CA) |
R. v. Jones (T.) (2016), 350 O.A.C. 274 (CA)
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [2016] O.A.C. TBEd. JL.006
Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Tristan Jones (appellant)
(C60011; 2016 ONCA 543)
Indexed As: R. v. Jones (T.)
Ontario Court of Appeal
MacPherson, MacFarland and LaForme, JJ.A.
July 8, 2016.
Summary:
The accused, Jones, and his co-accused, Smith and Waldron, were convicted of several firearms trafficking and drug trafficking offences. The convictions arose from a police investigation in Ottawa into the possession and trafficking of firearms. In the course of its investigation, the police obtained a production order pursuant to s. 487.012 of Part XV of the Criminal Code for records and text messages from a cell phone number (a Telus number) associated with Waldron. Jones appealed, arguing that the trial judge erred in holding that the accused did not have standing to challenge the production order (Charter, s. 8) and in holding that the production order was the proper mechanism for obtaining access to the cell phone records and text messages.
The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. As to the standing issue, it was open to the applications judge to find, on the record, that the accused had no subjective expectation of privacy in relation to the cell phone records produced by Telus. The court held further that it agreed with the application judge's findings that a Part VI authorization to intercept private communications (i.e., a wiretap authorization) was not needed for the search and seizure of historical text messages. The motions judge was correct in upholding the use of a production order to enable the police to obtain phone records from Telus.
Civil Rights - Topic 1508
Property - Expectation of privacy - See paragraphs 14 to 18.
Civil Rights - Topic 8380
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Status or standing - See paragraphs 14 to 18.
Civil Rights - Topic 8583
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Practice - Who may raise Charter issues (incl. standing) - See paragraphs 14 to 18.
Criminal Law - Topic 3012
Special powers - Third party production orders - When available - See paragraphs 19 to 36.
Criminal Law - Topic 3017
Special powers - Third party preservation and production orders - Computer data (incl. text messages) - See paragraphs 19 to 36.
Criminal Law - Topic 5275.1
Evidence and witnesses - Interception of private communications - Access to recordings and transcripts of intercepted communications (incl. text messages in computer database) - See paragraphs 19 to 36.
Criminal Law - Topic 5293
Evidence and witnesses - Admissibility of private communications - What constitutes "private communication" - See paragraphs 19 to 36.
Criminal Law - Topic 5294
Evidence and witnesses - Admissibility of private communications - What constitutes "interception" - See paragraphs 19 to 36.
Criminal Law - Topic 5383
Evidence and witnesses - Documents and reports - Telephone records (incl. text messages) - See paragraphs 23 to 26.
Counsel:
Patrick McCann, for the appellant;
Randy Schwartz, for the respondent, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario;
Nick Devlin, for the respondent, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada;
Susan Chapman and Naomi Greckol-Herlich, for the intervener, Criminal Lawyers' Association.
This appeal was heard on April 4 and 5, 2016, before MacPherson, MacFarland and LaForme, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The following decision was delivered by the court on July 8, 2016, including the following opinions:
MacPherson, J.A. (MacFarland, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 46;
Laforme, J.A., concurring - see paragraph 47.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R. v. Jones, 2017 SCC 60
...Privacy” (2011), 54 S.C.L.R. (2d) 335. APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal (MacPherson, MacFarland and LaForme JJ.A.), 2016 ONCA 543, 131 O.R. (3d) 604 , 361 C.R.R. (2d) 350 , 338 C.C.C. (3d) 591 , 350 O.A.C. 274 , [2016] O.J. No. 3737 (QL), 2016 CarswellOnt 10858 ......
-
R. v. Marakah (N.), 2016 ONCA 542
...issue on this appeal is whether the application judge's ruling is correct. [4] This appeal was heard together with R. v. Jones , 2016 ONCA 543 and R. v. Smith, 2016 ONCA 544. The court has released three separate sets of reasons in these appeals. B. FACTS (1) The parties and events [5] In 2......
-
R. v. Campbell,
...of Canada’s decision in Marakah. When the police made the decision to impersonate Gammie, this court’s decision in Marakah, 2016 ONCA 543, 131 O.R. (3d) 561, rev’d 2017 SCC 59, [2017] 2 S.C.R. 608, would appear to have authorized this approach. Moreover, the officers ma......
-
Court Of Appeal Summaries (July 4 July 8)
...Pornography, Creation of Child Pornography, Accessing Child Pornography, Evidence, Statements Made After Arrest, Voir Dire R. v. Jones, 2016 ONCA 543 [MacPherson, MacFarland and LaForme P. McCann, for the appellant R. Schwartz, for the respondent Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario N.......
-
R. v. Jones, 2017 SCC 60
...Privacy” (2011), 54 S.C.L.R. (2d) 335. APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal (MacPherson, MacFarland and LaForme JJ.A.), 2016 ONCA 543, 131 O.R. (3d) 604 , 361 C.R.R. (2d) 350 , 338 C.C.C. (3d) 591 , 350 O.A.C. 274 , [2016] O.J. No. 3737 (QL), 2016 CarswellOnt 10858 ......
-
R. v. Marakah (N.), 2016 ONCA 542
...issue on this appeal is whether the application judge's ruling is correct. [4] This appeal was heard together with R. v. Jones , 2016 ONCA 543 and R. v. Smith, 2016 ONCA 544. The court has released three separate sets of reasons in these appeals. B. FACTS (1) The parties and events [5] In 2......
-
R. v. Campbell,
...of Canada’s decision in Marakah. When the police made the decision to impersonate Gammie, this court’s decision in Marakah, 2016 ONCA 543, 131 O.R. (3d) 561, rev’d 2017 SCC 59, [2017] 2 S.C.R. 608, would appear to have authorized this approach. Moreover, the officers ma......
-
R. v. Smith (J.), (2016) 350 O.A.C. 284 (CA)
...sentence on the basis of the totality principle. [4] This appeal was heard together with R. v. Marakah , 2016 ONCA 542 and R. v. Jones , 2016 ONCA 543. The court has released three separate sets of reasons in these appeals. B. FACTS (1) The parties and events [5] Smith was charged with gun ......
-
Court Of Appeal Summaries (July 4 July 8)
...Pornography, Creation of Child Pornography, Accessing Child Pornography, Evidence, Statements Made After Arrest, Voir Dire R. v. Jones, 2016 ONCA 543 [MacPherson, MacFarland and LaForme P. McCann, for the appellant R. Schwartz, for the respondent Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario N.......
-
Supreme Court Of Canada Rules Text Messages Can Attract A Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy
...in Jones, they were on a service provider's server). At the Ontario Court of Appeal, in both R v Marakah, 2016 ONCA 542 and R v Jones, 2016 ONCA 543, the accused were denied standing to argue whether there had been a breach of their section 8 Charter rights. A key element of the Court of Ap......