R. v. Perfect (R.T.), (2001) 190 N.S.R.(2d) 37 (ProvCt)
Judge | Ross, P.C.J. |
Court | Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada) |
Case Date | January 18, 2001 |
Jurisdiction | Nova Scotia |
Citations | (2001), 190 N.S.R.(2d) 37 (ProvCt) |
R. v. Perfect (R.T.) (2001), 190 N.S.R.(2d) 37 (ProvCt);
594 A.P.R. 37
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [2001] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. JA.034
Her Majesty the Queen v. Ronald Timothy Perfect
Indexed As: R. v. Perfect (R.T.)
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Ross, P.C.J.
January 18, 2001.
Summary:
An accused found guilty of trafficking in a narcotic sought a stay of proceedings on the ground of entrapment by a police agent.
The Nova Scotia Provincial Court held that the evidence did not support a finding of entrapment.
Criminal Law - Topic 205
General principles - Common law defences - Entrapment - Agents provocateur - A convicted drug trafficker (Lee) was paid by police for undercover assistance in investigating certain persons known to be involved in the drug trade, including the accused - The accused and Lee had a pre-existing friendship and business relationship - Lee "persistently" pursued the accused to supply him with drugs - Lee wore a "wire" for all meetings - The accused finally supplied Lee with drugs and was charged with trafficking - The accused alleged entrapment and sought a stay of proceedings, submitting that Lee's conduct went beyond merely providing him with an opportunity to commit an offence - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court found no entrapment - The tape recorded conversations showed the accused never refused to supply drugs - Although the accused occasionally showed some reluctance, the evidence fell short of showing any undue pressure, emotional manipulation or anything else amounting to an exploitation of their pre-existing friendship - See paragraphs 1 to 38.
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Mack (1988), 90 N.R. 173; 44 C.C.C.(3d) 513 (S.C.C.), appld. [para. 1].
R. v. Showman (1988), 90 N.R. 262; 67 C.R.(3d) 61 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 31].
R. v. Naoufal (N.) (1994), 70 O.A.C. 214; 31 C.R.(3d) 105 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 31].
R. v. Dikah (A.) - see R. v. Naoufal (N.).
R. v. Maxwell (1990), 42 O.A.C. 71; 3 C.R.(4th) 31 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 44].
R. v. Meuckon, [1990] B.C.J. No. 1152 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 45].
R. v. Ferrant, [1994] O.J. No. 2599 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 46].
R. v. Costain, [1999] N.S.J. No. 443 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 47].
R. v. Smith (K.B.) (1995), 142 N.S.R.(2d) 81; 407 A.P.R. 81 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 48].
R. v. LeBrasseur (1995), 102 C.C.C.(3d) 167 (Que. C.A.), refd to. [para. 50].
R. v. Prime (1991), 121 A.R. 154 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 51].
R. v. Morin (I.J.) (1999), 175 Sask.R. 305 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 52].
R. v. Norberg (R.) (1997), 167 Sask.R. 11 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 53].
R. v. Keraluk, [1992] S.J. No. 244 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 54].
R. v. Milley (R.S.) (1995), 125 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 97; 389 A.P.R. 97 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Marriott (P.) (1995), 146 N.S.R.(2d) 311; 422 A.P.R. 311 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Ziade (N.), [1999] O.A.C. Uned. 350 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Sugden (1991), 49 O.A.C. 20 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Almgren, [1993] O.J. No. 3026 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Norman, [1994] Y.J. No. 61 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Gesy (H.G.) (1998), 171 Sask.R. 161 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Benedetti (R.F.) (1997), 200 A.R. 179; 146 W.A.C. 179 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Brown, 40 W.C.B.(2d) 395 (C.M.A.C.), refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Elzein (1993), 82 C.C.C.(3d) 455 (Que. S.C.), refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Reid (1996), 155 N.S.R.(2d) 368; 457 A.P.R. 368 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 55].
Counsel:
David Iannetti, for the Crown;
William Burchell, Q.C., for the accused.
This application was heard at Sydney, N.S., before Ross, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on January 18, 2001.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
R. v. Reid (L.) et al., (2001) 202 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 69 (NFPC)
...to. [para. 36]. R. v. Au Canada Monetary Exchange Inc., [1999] B.C.J. No. 455 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 39]. R. v. Perfect (R.T.) (2001), 190 N.S.R.(2d) 37; 594 A.P.R. 37 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. R. v. Wholesale Travel Group Inc. and Chedore, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 154; 130 N.R. 1; 49 O.A.C. 161......
-
R. v. Robichaud (T.J.), 2009 NSPC 53
...refd to. [para. 3]. R. v. Smith (K.B.) (1995), 142 N.S.R.(2d) 81; 407 A.P.R. 81 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 3]. R. v. Perfect (R.T.) (2001), 190 N.S.R.(2d) 37; 594 A.P.R. 37 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. R. v. Chu, 2009 BCPC 76, refd to. [para. 3]. R. v. Collier (G.E.) (2005), 286 N.B.R.(2d) 218......
-
R. v. McCormick (D.W.), (2012) 319 N.S.R.(2d) 17 (SC)
...4]. R. v. Regan (G.A.) (2002), 282 N.R. 1; 201 N.S.R.(2d) 63; 629 A.P.R. 63; 2002 SCC 12, dist. [para. 48]. R. v. Perfect (R.T.) (2001), 190 N.S.R.(2d) 37; 594 A.P.R. 37 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. R. v. Stinchcombe, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 326; 130 N.R. 277; 120 A.R. 161; 8 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [......
-
R. v. Reid (L.) et al., (2001) 202 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 69 (NFPC)
...to. [para. 36]. R. v. Au Canada Monetary Exchange Inc., [1999] B.C.J. No. 455 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 39]. R. v. Perfect (R.T.) (2001), 190 N.S.R.(2d) 37; 594 A.P.R. 37 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. R. v. Wholesale Travel Group Inc. and Chedore, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 154; 130 N.R. 1; 49 O.A.C. 161......
-
R. v. Robichaud (T.J.), 2009 NSPC 53
...refd to. [para. 3]. R. v. Smith (K.B.) (1995), 142 N.S.R.(2d) 81; 407 A.P.R. 81 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 3]. R. v. Perfect (R.T.) (2001), 190 N.S.R.(2d) 37; 594 A.P.R. 37 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. R. v. Chu, 2009 BCPC 76, refd to. [para. 3]. R. v. Collier (G.E.) (2005), 286 N.B.R.(2d) 218......
-
R. v. McCormick (D.W.), (2012) 319 N.S.R.(2d) 17 (SC)
...4]. R. v. Regan (G.A.) (2002), 282 N.R. 1; 201 N.S.R.(2d) 63; 629 A.P.R. 63; 2002 SCC 12, dist. [para. 48]. R. v. Perfect (R.T.) (2001), 190 N.S.R.(2d) 37; 594 A.P.R. 37 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. R. v. Stinchcombe, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 326; 130 N.R. 277; 120 A.R. 161; 8 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [......