R. v. Lenihan (O.E.), (1997) 158 N.S.R.(2d) 216 (CA)
Judge | Hallett, Chipman and Pugsley, JJ.A. |
Court | Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia (Canada) |
Case Date | February 25, 1997 |
Jurisdiction | Nova Scotia |
Citations | (1997), 158 N.S.R.(2d) 216 (CA) |
R. v. Lenihan (O.E.) (1997), 158 N.S.R.(2d) 216 (CA);
466 A.P.R. 216
MLB headnote and full text
Otis Edward Lenihan (appellant) v. Her Majesty The Queen (respondent)
(C.A.C. No. 129710)
Indexed As: R. v. Lenihan (O.E.)
Nova Scotia Court of Appeal
Hallett, Chipman and Pugsley, JJ.A.
February 25, 1997.
Summary:
A peace officer appointed to monitor Nova Scotia's highways for overweight vehicles had reason to believe, on visual inspection, that the accused's truck and load exceeded the maximums permitted under the Motor Vehicle Act Regulations. The officer stopped the accused, ordered him to proceed to his portable scales, and weighed the truck. The truck exceeded the maximum permitted under the Regulations and the accused was charged accordingly. At no time did the officer advise the accused that he had the right to obtain and instruct counsel without delay. The accused sought to exclude the evidence obtained by the officer, arguing that it was obtained contrary to the Charter, s. 10(b).
The Nova Scotia Provincial Court, in a decision reported 152 N.S.R.(2d) 264; 442 A.P.R. 264, dismissed the application. The accused appealed.
The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
Civil Rights - Topic 3604
Detention and imprisonment - Detention - What constitutes detention - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 3214 ].
Civil Rights - Topic 4602
Right to counsel - Denial of - Evidence taken inadmissible - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 3214 ].
Civil Rights - Topic 4604
Right to counsel - Denial of - What constitutes - A peace officer believed that the accused's truck and load were overweight - He stopped the accused, ordered him to proceed to his portable scales, and weighed the truck (Motor Vehicle Act, s. 192) - The trial judge held that the accused was detained and not advised of his s. 10(b) Charter right to counsel, and that the weight evidence was obtained as a result of the Charter violation - However, he refused to exclude the evidence - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal questioned whether the accused had a Charter right to counsel in the circumstances - The court opined that s. 192 and the Regulations creating the offence of operating an overweight truck on a public highway could be justified under s. 1 of the Charter - See paragraphs 42 to 44.
Civil Rights - Topic 4613
Right to counsel - Requirement of arrest or detention and notice of reasons for - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 3214 ].
Civil Rights - Topic 8348
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application - Exceptions - Reasonable limits prescribed by law (Charter, s. 1) - [See Civil Rights - Topic 4604 ].
Civil Rights - Topic 8368
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Exclusion of evidence - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 3214 ].
Civil Rights - Topic 8550
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Interpretation - Particular phrases - Bring the administration of justice into disrepute (s. 24(2)) - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 3214 ].
Motor Vehicles - Topic 3206
Regulation of vehicles and traffic - Vehicles - Excess weight - Demand that vehicle be weighed - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 3214 ].
Motor Vehicles - Topic 3214
Regulation of vehicles and traffic - Vehicles - Excess weight - Defences - A peace officer believed that the accused's truck and load were overweight - He stopped the accused, ordered him to proceed to his portable scales, and weighed the truck - At no time did he advise the accused of his right to counsel (Charter, s. 10(b)) - The trial judge held that the accused was detained and not advised of his right to counsel, and that the weight evidence was obtained as a result of the Charter violation - However, he refused to exclude the evidence, holding that its admission would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute - The accused appealed - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, assuming without deciding that there was a detention (and therefore a requirement to advise the accused of his right to counsel), dismissed the appeal.
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Therens, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 613; 59 N.R. 122; 40 Sask.R. 122; 18 D.L.R.(4th) 655; [1985] 4 W.W.R. 286; 32 M.V.R. 153; 45 C.R.(3d) 97; 18 C.C.C.(3d) 481, dist. [para. 10].
R. v. Wholesale Travel Group Inc. and Chedore, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 154; 130 N.R. 1; 49 O.A.C. 161; 67 C.C.C.(3d) 193; 8 C.R.(4th) 145; 84 D.L.R.(4th) 161, appld. [para. 12].
R. v. Fitzpatrick (B.), [1995] 4 S.C.R. 154; 188 N.R. 248; 65 B.C.A.C. 1; 106 W.A.C. 1; 102 C.C.C.(3d) 144, appld. [para. 14].
R. v. Collins, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 265; 74 N.R. 276; 33 C.C.C. 1, appld. [para. 16].
R. v. Mellenthin, [1992] 3 S.C.R. 615; 144 N.R. 50; 135 A.R. 1; 33 W.A.C. 1; 76 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 16 C.R.(4th) 273, dist. [para. 20].
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; 124 D.L.R.(4th) 7, dist. [para. 20].
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, refd to. [para. 28].
R. v. Gray (H.W.) (1987), 67 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 141; 206 A.P.R. 141 (P.E.I.S.C.), disagreed with [para. 39].
R. v. Saunders (1988), 27 O.A.C. 184; 41 C.C.C.(3d) 532 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 43].
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. [para. 43].
Statutes Noticed:
Motor Vehicle Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 293, sect. 192 [para. 6].
Counsel:
Geoffrey P. Muttart, for the appellant;
Denise C. Smith, for the respondent.
This appeal was heard on January 28, 1997, by Hallett, Chipman and Pugsley, JJ.A., of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal.
Hallett, J.A., delivered the following judgment on February 25, 1997.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
R. v. M.R.M., (1997) 159 N.S.R.(2d) 321 (CA)
...[para. 90]. R. v. Colarusso (1994), 162 N.R. 321; 69 O.A.C. 81; 87 C.C.C.(3d) 193 (S.C.C.), dist. [para. 97]. R. v. Lenihan (O.E.) (1997), 158 N.S.R.(2d) 216; 466 A.P.R. 216 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 111]. R. v. Therens, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 613; 59 N.R. 122; 40 Sask.R. 122; 18 D.L.R.(4th) 655; [1......
-
R. v. P.R.C., 2000 PESCTD 22
...481, refd to. [para. 9]. R. v. Grafe (1987), 22 O.A.C. 280; 36 C.C.C.(3d) 267 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9]. R. v. Lenihan (O.E.) (1997), 158 N.S.R.(2d) 216; 466 A.P.R. 216 (C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. Fitzpatrick (B.), [1995] 4 S.C.R. 154; 188 N.R. 248; 65 B.C.A.C. 1; 106 W.A.C. 1; 102 C.C.C......
-
Richardson v. Payne et al., (1998) 204 N.B.R.(2d) 203 (TD)
...v. Picard and Minister of Justice (1984), 53 N.B.R.(2d) 169; 138 A.P.R. 169 (T.D.), folld. [para. 14]. R. v. Lenihan (O.E.) (1997), 158 N.S.R.(2d) 216; 466 A.P.R. 216 (C.A.), consd. [para. 25]. R. v. Wholesale Travel Group Inc. and Chedore, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 154; 130 N.R. 1; 49 O.A.C. 161; 84......
-
Broad v. Woodstock (Town), (2010) 365 N.B.R.(2d) 291 (TD)
...48]. R. v. M.R.M., [1998] 3 S.C.R. 393; 233 N.R. 1; 171 N.S.R.(2d) 125; 519 A.P.R. 125, consd. [para. 50]. R. v. Lenihan (O.E.) (1997), 158 N.S.R.(2d) 216; 466 A.P.R. 216; 115 C.C.C.(3d) 246 (C.A.), consd. [para. Statutes Noticed: Intoxicated Persons Detention Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. I-14, s......
-
R. v. M.R.M., (1997) 159 N.S.R.(2d) 321 (CA)
...[para. 90]. R. v. Colarusso (1994), 162 N.R. 321; 69 O.A.C. 81; 87 C.C.C.(3d) 193 (S.C.C.), dist. [para. 97]. R. v. Lenihan (O.E.) (1997), 158 N.S.R.(2d) 216; 466 A.P.R. 216 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 111]. R. v. Therens, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 613; 59 N.R. 122; 40 Sask.R. 122; 18 D.L.R.(4th) 655; [1......
-
R. v. P.R.C., 2000 PESCTD 22
...481, refd to. [para. 9]. R. v. Grafe (1987), 22 O.A.C. 280; 36 C.C.C.(3d) 267 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9]. R. v. Lenihan (O.E.) (1997), 158 N.S.R.(2d) 216; 466 A.P.R. 216 (C.A.), refd to. [para. R. v. Fitzpatrick (B.), [1995] 4 S.C.R. 154; 188 N.R. 248; 65 B.C.A.C. 1; 106 W.A.C. 1; 102 C.C.C......
-
Richardson v. Payne et al., (1998) 204 N.B.R.(2d) 203 (TD)
...v. Picard and Minister of Justice (1984), 53 N.B.R.(2d) 169; 138 A.P.R. 169 (T.D.), folld. [para. 14]. R. v. Lenihan (O.E.) (1997), 158 N.S.R.(2d) 216; 466 A.P.R. 216 (C.A.), consd. [para. 25]. R. v. Wholesale Travel Group Inc. and Chedore, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 154; 130 N.R. 1; 49 O.A.C. 161; 84......
-
Broad v. Woodstock (Town), (2010) 365 N.B.R.(2d) 291 (TD)
...48]. R. v. M.R.M., [1998] 3 S.C.R. 393; 233 N.R. 1; 171 N.S.R.(2d) 125; 519 A.P.R. 125, consd. [para. 50]. R. v. Lenihan (O.E.) (1997), 158 N.S.R.(2d) 216; 466 A.P.R. 216; 115 C.C.C.(3d) 246 (C.A.), consd. [para. Statutes Noticed: Intoxicated Persons Detention Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. I-14, s......