R. v. Katzman (R.), (2000) 196 Sask.R. 193 (QB)

• Judge: McLellan, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: July 04, 2000
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2000), 196 Sask.R. 193 (QB);2000 SKQB 305

R. v. Katzman (R.) (2000), 196 Sask.R. 193 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] Sask.R. TBEd. JL.042

Ralph Katzman (applicant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent)

(1998 Q.B.C. No. 56; 2000 SKQB 305)

Indexed As: R. v. Katzman (R.)

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Regina

McLellan, J.

July 4, 2000.

Summary:

An accused applied to have three search warrants set aside and the evidence obtained as a result of their execution ruled inadmissible.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application.

Civil Rights - Topic 1646

Property - Search and seizure - Unreasonable search and seizure defined - Liberty - Limitations on - Compelled testimony - An accused subpoenaed Katzman to testify - The police used Katzman's testimony to obtain a warrant to search his residence - The police seized cancelled cheques and bank statements - Katzman was charged with theft, fraud and breach of trust - Katzman applied to set aside the search warrant on the basis that his s. 7, 8 or 13 Charter rights were infringed - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application - The RCMP would have discovered the evidence but for the fact that Katzman had lied - Katzman waived his right to remain silent by providing false information - Absent the false information, it was reasonable to assume that Katzman had possession of the cheques and statements and that they were located at his residence - Alternatively, admission of the evidence would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute - See paragraphs 56 to 73.

Civil Rights - Topic 3160

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal proceedings - Right to remain silent and protection against self-incrimination (Charter, s. 7) - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1646 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 4462

Protection against self-incrimination - Use of incriminating evidence in other proceedings - Derivative evidence - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1646 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 4470

Protection against self-incrimination - Use of incriminating evidence in other proceedings - Where rights waived - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1646 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8368

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Exclusion of evidence - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1646 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 3113

Special powers - Setting aside search warrants - General - Scope of review - An accused was charged with theft, fraud and breach of trust - The charges related to theft of $450,000 from the Progressive Conservative Caucus - The accused applied to have search warrants set aside, asserting that the supporting informations were not sufficient - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench reviewed the informations and rejected the assertion - The informations did not contain material omissions and nondisclosure, material misrepresentations or false averments - The averments did not give a misleading impression of the investigation, nor facts, rules and regulations surrounding caucus grants - Further, the argument that the facts contained in the informations, on their face, did not afford reasonable and probable grounds of theft, fraud or breach of trust, were matters to be decided at trial - See paragraphs 25 to 51.

Criminal Law - Topic 3184

Special powers - Setting aside search warrants - Grounds - Falsehood or misleading statements in sworn information - [See Criminal Law - Topic 3113 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Grant (D.), [1993] 3 S.C.R. 223; 159 N.R. 161; 35 B.C.A.C. 1; 57 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Morris (W.R.) (1998), 173 N.S.R.(2d) 1; 527 A.P.R. 1; 134 C.C.C.(3d) 539 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Debot, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1140; 102 N.R. 161; 37 O.A.C. 1; 52 C.C.C.(3d) 193, refd to. [para. 24].

R. v. Church of Scientology of Toronto and Zaharia (1987), 18 O.A.C. 321; 31 C.C.C.(3d) 449 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Baker (H.D.) (1997), 155 Sask.R. 295 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 59].

R. v. R.J.S., [1995] 1 S.C.R. 451; 177 N.R. 81; 78 O.A.C. 161; 96 C.C.C.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 63].

British Columbia Securities Commission v. Branch and Levitt, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 3; 180 N.R. 241; 60 B.C.A.C. 1; 99 W.A.C. 1; 97 C.C.C.(3d) 505, refd to. [para. 65].

R. v. Belnavis (A.) and Lawrence (C.) (1996), 91 O.A.C. 3; 107 C.C.C.(3d) 195 (C.A.), folld. [para. 66].

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; 97 C.C.C.(3d) 385, refd to. [para. 67].

Counsel:

Ralph K. Ottenbreit, Q.C., for the applicant;

Sharon H. Pratchler, for the respondent.

This application was heard by McLellan, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Regina, who delivered the following judgment on July 4, 2000.