R. v. Robichaud (T.J.), 2009 NSPC 53

JudgeBeaton, P.C.J.
CourtProvincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
Case DateSeptember 04, 2009
JurisdictionNova Scotia
Citations2009 NSPC 53;(2009), 284 N.S.R.(2d) 67 (PC)

R. v. Robichaud (T.J.) (2009), 284 N.S.R.(2d) 67 (PC);

    901 A.P.R. 67

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2009] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. OC.036

Her Majesty the Queen v. Trevor John Robichaud

(C-1998194; 2009 NSPC 53)

Indexed As: R. v. Robichaud (T.J.)

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Beaton, P.C.J.

September 4, 2009.

Summary:

The accused pled guilty to trafficking in cocaine (Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, s. 5(1)) but applied for a stay of proceedings under s. 24(1) of the Charter on the basis that he was entrapped into the commission of the offence.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court dismissed the application.

Criminal Law - Topic 205

General principles - Common law defences - Entrapment - Agent provocateur - Police conducted an undercover operation using undercover agents to seek drugs from targeted individuals and to attempt to purchase illicit drugs, particularly cocaine - Two female undercover agents attended a local bar and while there they were approached by the accused - During the five minute conversation that ensued the undercover agents indicated that they were hoping to acquire drugs and he eventually offered to obtain drugs for them - The officers gave him the money and he left his identification with them, left the bar, and returned a short time later with a gram of cocaine for the officers - The accused pled guilty to trafficking in cocaine but applied for a stay of proceedings (Charter, s. 24(1)) on the basis that he was entrapped into the commission of the offence - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court dismissed the application - The officers were in a particular location that was under suspicion, it was a targeted area and, as a result of encountering the accused, who was not himself specifically under suspicion, the police were nonetheless acting pursuant to a bona fide inquiry - The officers' actions and words did not induce the commission of the offence - They never specifically or directly asked or encouraged the accused to purchase drugs - The accused testified that he was in the bar to "pick up chicks" - He purchased drinks for the officers and seized upon the acquisition of drugs as a method to gain favour or advantage with them - The average person with both strengths and weaknesses would not necessarily have been induced by the officers' actions to obtain the drugs that they expressed a wish to have.

Criminal Law - Topic 205.1

General principles - Common law defences - Entrapment - Requirement of reasonable suspicion or a bona fide investigation - [See Criminal Law - Topic 205 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Mack, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 903; 90 N.R. 173, 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. 3].

R. v. Chu, 2009 BCPC 76, refd to. [para. 3].

R. v. Collier (G.E.) (2005), 286 N.B.R.(2d) 218; 748 A.P.R. 218; 2005 NBPC 28, refd to. [para. 3].

R. v. El-Sheikh-Ali, [1993] O.J. No. 2413 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 3].

R. v. Barnes, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 449; 121 N.R. 267, refd to. [para. 3].

R. v. Pearson (E.) (1998), 233 N.R. 367; 130 C.C.C.(3d) 293 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 5].

Counsel:

Douglas B. Shatford, Q.C., for the Crown;

Jim O'Neil, for the defence.

This application was heard at Amherst, Nova Scotia, on September 4, 2009, before Beaton, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, whose following oral decision of that date, was released in writing on October 23, 2009.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT