R. v. Phung (J.), (2013) 542 A.R. 392

• Jurisdiction: Alberta
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Judge: Paperny, Watson and McDonald, JJ.A.
• Citation: (2013), 542 A.R. 392,2013 ABCA 63
• Date: 06 February 2013

R. v. Phung (J.) (2013), 542 A.R. 392; 566 W.A.C. 392 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] A.R. TBEd. FE.086

Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Jimmy Phung (appellant)

(1101-0269-A; 2013 ABCA 63)

Indexed As: R. v. Phung (J.)

Alberta Court of Appeal

Paperny, Watson and McDonald, JJ.A.

February 6, 2013.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of eight offences, including possession of drugs, stolen property and weaponry. He appealed, challenging a voir dire ruling which allowed into evidence drugs and weapons obtained by police in searches.

The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Civil Rights - Topic 1262

Security of the person - Lawful arrest - What constitutes - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1646 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 1604

Property - Search warrants - Validity of - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1646 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 1646

Property - Search and seizure - Unreasonable search and seizure defined - After tips by two informers, police conducted surveillance on the accused - They observed what they believed to be a drug transaction and arrested the accused - The police executed search warrants on two residences and seized drugs and weapons - The accused was convicted of eight offences, including possession of drugs, stolen property and weaponry - He appealed, challenging a voir dire ruling which allowed into evidence drugs and weapons obtained by police in the searches - The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - The trial judge did not err in concluding that there were reasonable and probable grounds to arrest the accused - It followed that there were no breaches of s. 8 and s. 9 of the Charter in the arrest, and no taint to the content of the Informations to Obtain the search warrants from the arrest - See paragraphs 7 to 15 - Further, the court was not persuaded that the trial judge's conclusion as to admission of the evidence under s. 24(2) of the Charter betrayed error - While she addressed this question in connection with the point under s. 10(b) of the Charter, she identified the correct law and the applicable three lines of inquiry - There was no finding of a gross departure from objectively reasonable grounds for search and no finding that the police were engaged in deliberate Charter infringement - Once that evidence became admissible, the application of s. 24(2) to exclude the search warrants products fell away as well - See paragraph 17.

Civil Rights - Topic 3603

Detention and imprisonment - Detention - What constitutes arbitrary detention - [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 ].

Police - Topic 3063

Powers - Arrest and detention - Without warrant - Reasonable and probable grounds - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1646 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Stillman (W.W.D.), [1997] 1 S.C.R. 607; 209 N.R. 81; 185 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 472 A.P.R. 1; 113 C.C.C.(3d) 321, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Shepherd (C.), [2009] 2 S.C.R. 527; 391 N.R. 132; 331 Sask.R. 306; 460 W.A.C. 306; 2009 SCC 35, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Biccum (C.D.) (2012), 522 A.R. 310; 544 W.A.C. 310 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Nicholson (J.D.) (2011), 510 A.R. 308; 527 W.A.C. 308; 2011 ABCA 218, leave to appeal denied (2011), 431 N.R. 399 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Mehari (S.T.) (2011), 499 A.R. 161; 514 W.A.C. 161; 2011 ABCA 67, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Loewen (D.J.) (2010), 490 A.R. 72; 497 W.A.C. 72; 2010 ABCA 255, affd. [2011] 2 S.C.R. 167; 415 N.R. 397; 502 A.R. 3; 517 W.A.C. 3; 2011 SCC 21, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Harding (S.G.) (2010), 482 A.R. 262; 490 W.A.C. 262; 2010 ABCA 180, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Abdo (H.M.) (2009), 464 A.R. 147; 467 W.A.C. 147; 2009 ABCA 340, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Dill (T.T.) (2009), 464 A.R. 92; 467 W.A.C. 92; 2009 ABCA 332, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Storrey, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 241; 105 N.R. 81; 37 O.A.C. 161; 53 C.C.C.(3d) 316, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Rajaratnam (M.) (2006), 397 A.R. 126; 384 W.A.C. 126; 2006 ABCA 333, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Lawes (B.), [2007] O.A.C. Uned. 6; 2007 ONCA 10, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. MacKenzie (B.C.), [2011] 12 W.W.R. 102; 371 Sask.R. 291; 518 W.A.C. 291; 2011 SKCA 64, leave to appeal granted (2012), 435 N.R. 395 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Wilson (A.J.) (2013), 331 B.C.A.C. 195; 565 W.A.C. 195; 2012 CarswellBC 4009; 2012 BCCA 517, refd to. [para. 10].

Southam Inc. v. Hunter et al., [1984] 2 S.C.R. 145; 55 N.R. 241; 55 A.R. 291; 14 C.C.C.(3d) 97, refd to. [para. 11].

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. 11].

R. v. Shinkewski (L.A.), [2009] 9 W.W.R. 674; 399 Sask.R. 11; 552 W.A.C. 11; 2012 SKCA 63, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Simpson (R.) (1993), 60 O.A.C. 327; 12 O.R.(3d) 182 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 11].

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; 139 D.L.R.(4th) 223, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Mann (P.H.), [2004] 3 S.C.R. 59; 324 N.R. 215; 187 Man.R.(2d) 1; 330 W.A.C. 1; 2004 SCC 52, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Greffe, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 755; 107 N.R. 1; 107 A.R. 1; 55 C.C.C.(3d) 161, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Garofoli et al., [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1421; 116 N.R. 241; 43 O.A.C. 1; 36 Q.A.C. 161; 60 C.C.C.(3d) 161, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Plant (R.S.), [1993] 3 S.C.R. 281; 157 N.R. 321; 145 A.R. 104; 55 W.A.C. 104, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Hillgardener (A.R.) (2010), 477 A.R. 200; 483 W.A.C. 200; 2010 ABCA 80, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Safi (N.) (2010), 487 A.R. 164; 495 W.A.C. 164; 2010 ABCA 151, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Burke (S.R.) (2011), 374 N.B.R.(2d) 255; 965 A.P.R. 255; 275 C.C.C.(3d) 90; 2011 NBCA 51, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. N.O. (2009), 448 A.R. 253; 447 W.A.C. 253; 2 Alta. L.R.(5th) 72; 2009 ABCA 75, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Rahmani-Shirazi (O.R.) (2008), 451 A.R. 145; 2008 ABQB 145, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Parchment (O.C.) (2007), 243 B.C.A.C. 161; 401 W.A.C. 161; 2007 BCCA 326, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Lucia (K.F.), [2010] O.A.C. Uned. 357; 2010 CarswellOnt 5348; 2010 ONCA 533, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Caravaggio (F.A.), [2012] O.A.C. Uned. 212; 2012 CarswellOnt 4452; 2012 ONCA 248, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Caissey (L.M.) (2007), 422 A.R. 208; 415 W.A.C. 208; 2007 ABCA 380, affd. [2008] 3 S.C.R. 451; 382 N.R. 198; 446 A.R. 397; 442 W.A.C. 397; 2008 SCC 65, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Araujo (A.) et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 992; 262 N.R. 346; 143 B.C.A.C. 257; 235 W.A.C. 257; 2000 SCC 65, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. U.P.M., [2010] 1 S.C.R. 253; 399 N.R. 200; 346 Sask.R. 1; 477 W.A.C. 1; 2010 SCC 8, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Campbell (N.M.), [2011] 2 S.C.R. 549; 418 N.R. 1; 279 O.A.C. 52; 2011 SCC 32, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Dionisi (A.P.) (2012), 519 A.R. 313; 539 W.A.C. 313; 2012 ABCA 20, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Lee (B.) (2011), 515 A.R. 65; 532 W.A.C. 65; 2011 ABCA 310, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Morris (W.R.) (1999), 173 N.S.R.(2d) 1; 527 A.P.R. 1; 134 C.C.C.(3d) 539; 23 C.R.(5th) 354 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Ngai (K.W.) (2010), 474 A.R. 230; 479 W.A.C. 230; 2010 ABCA 10, refd to. [para. 17].

Counsel:

D.A. Spaner, for the respondent;

H.E. Wolch, Q.C., for the appellant.

This appeal was heard and decided on February 6, 2013, by Paperny, Watson and McDonald, JJ.A. of the Alberta Court of Appeal. The following memorandum of judgment of the Court of Appeal was filed on February 14, 2013.