R. v. Smith, (1983) 46 A.R. 111 (NWTSC)

Judgede Weerdt, J.
CourtSupreme Court of Northwest Territories (Canada)
Case DateMay 25, 1983
JurisdictionNorthwest Territories
Citations(1983), 46 A.R. 111 (NWTSC)

R. v. Smith (1983), 46 A.R. 111 (NWTSC)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Smith

Indexed As: R. v. Smith

Northwest Territories Supreme Court

de Weerdt, J.

May 25, 1983

Summary:

An accused was charged with second degree murder. A voir dire was held to determine the admissibility of statements made by the accused to the police. Two tape recorded statements were held to be inadmissible. The Northwest Territories Supreme Court acquitted the accused on a directed verdict of not guilty after the Crown called no evidence.

Civil Rights - Topic 1287

Security of the person - Unlawful arrest - Right to be informed of reason for arrest - A suspect in a murder voluntarily accompanied police to the police station to answer questions - She was detained in a cell and subjected to repeated and lengthy interrogations, without being informed that she was under arrest or the reason why - She was also not informed of her right to counsel - The Northwest Territories Supreme Court held that the actions of the police constituted an unlawful arrest - See paragraphs 27 to 30.

Criminal Law - Topic 5355

Evidence and witnesses - Confessions and voluntary statements - Whether statement was made freely and voluntarily - A suspect in a murder was unlawfully arrested and subjected to lengthy and repeated interrogation - She was not informed of the reason she was arrested or of her right to counsel - The Northwest Territories Supreme Court held that statements made during the interrogations were inadmissible, because statements induced by an unlawful arrest were not freely and voluntarily made - See paragraphs 54 to 58.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Ibrahim, [1914] A.C. 599, refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Boudreau, [1949] S.C.R. 262; 94 C.C.C. 1; [1949] 3 D.L.R. 81, refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Piche, [1971] S.C.R. 23; [1970] 4 C.C.C. 27; 12 C.R.N.S. 222; 11 D.L. R.(3d) 700; 74 W.W.R.(N.S.) 674; refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Winsor (1864), 4 F.& F. 360; 176 E.R. 599, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Boucher, [1955] S.C.R. 16, 20 C.R. 1; 110 C.C.C. 263, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Thiffault, [1933] S.C.R. 509; 60 C.C.C. 97; [1933] 3 D.L.R. 59, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Koszulap (1974), 20 C.C.C.(2d) 193; 27 C.R.N.S. 226 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Kacherowski, [1978] 1 W.W.R. 209; 7 A.R. 284, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Settee, [1975] 3 W.W.R. 177; 29 C.R.N.S. 104; 22 C.C.C.(2d) 193 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Sankey, [1927] S.C.R. 436; 48 C.C.C. 97, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Conkie (1978), 3 C.R.(3d) 7; 29 C.C.C.(2d) 408; 9 A.R. 115 (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Hartridge, [1967] 1 C.C.C. 346; 48 C.R. 389; 57 D.L.R.(2d) 332; 56 W.W.R.(N.S.) 385 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Colpitts, [1965] S.C.R. 739; 47 C.R. 175; [1966] 1 C.C.C. 146; 52 D.L.R.(2d) 416, refd to. [para. 21].

Spicer v. Holt, [1977] A.C. 987; [1976] 3 All E.R. 71; [1976] 3 W. L.R. 398; 63 Cr. App. Rep. 270 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 28].

Bird v. Jones (1845), 7 Q.B. 742; 115 E.R. 668, refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Whitfield, [1970] S.C.R. 46; 7 D.L.R.(3d) 97; 9 C.R.N.S. 59; [1970] 1 C.C.C. 129, refd to. [para. 31].

Higgins v. MacDonald et al., [1928] 1 W.W.R. 529; [1928] 2 D.L.R. 89; 39 B.C.R. 465, affd. [1928] 3 W.W.R. 115; [1928] 4 D.L.R. 241; 50 C.C.C. 353; 40 B.C.R. 150 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 32].

Kozak v. Beatty (1956-57), 20 W.W.R.(N.S.) 497; 7 D.L.R.(2d) 88; 118 C. C.C. 72 (Sask. C.A.); affd. [1958] S.C.R. 177; 13 D.L.R.(2d) 1; 120 C.C.C. 1, refd to. [para. 32].

Florida v. Roger (1983), 103 S.Ct. 1319, refd to. [para. 40].

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1; 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed. 2d 899, refd to. [para. 40].

Christie v. Leachinsky, [1946] K.B. 124; [1945] 2 All E.R. 395(C.A.), [1947] A.C. 573, 602; [1947] 1 All E.R. 567, refd to. [para. 41].

R. v. Chromiak, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 471; 29 A.R. 441; 102 D.L.R.(3d) 468; 49 C.C.C.(2d) 257, appld. [para. 42].

R. v. Antoine (1982), 16 Man.R.(2d) 303; 70 C.C.C.(2d) 140, refd to. [para. 55].

R. v. Howlett, [1950] 2 D.L.R. 517; [1950] O.R. 181; 96 C.C.C. 182; 9 C.R. 196 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

R. v. Fitton, [1956] S.C.R. 958; 116 C.C.C. 1; 24 C.R. 371; 6 D.L.R.(2d) 529, refd to. [para. 57].

R. v. Hovarth, [1979] 3 W.W.R. 1; 7 C.R.(3d) 97; 44 C.C.C.(2d) 385; 93 D.L.R.(3d) 1; 24 N.R. 537 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 57].

R. v. Burke, [1979] 1 W.W.R. 289 (Man. C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

R. v. Andrews (1981), 21 C.R.(3d) 291 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

R. v. Hall (1981), 64 C.C.C.(2d) 463 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

R. v. Hayes (1982), 34 A.R. 472; 65 C.C.C.(2d) 294 (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

R. v. Kennedy (1981), 10 Man.R.(2d) 104; 63 C.C.C.(2d) 244 (Man. C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

R. v. Chapdelaine (1933), 62 C.C.C. 209 (Que. K.B.), refd to. [para. 57].

Chartier v. A.G. Quebec, [1979] 2 S.C.R. 474; 48 C.C.C.(2d) 34; 9 C.R.(3d) 97; 104 D.L.R.(3d) 321; 27 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 59].

R. v. Botfield (1973), 28 C.C.C.(2d) 472; 32 C.R.N.S. 1 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

Authors and Works :

Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765-1770), vol. 3, p. 127 [para. 27].

Devlin, The Criminal Prosecution in England (1958), p. 82 [para. 28].

Canadian Committee on Corrections, Towards Unity: Criminal Justice and Corrections, p. 56 [para. 38].

Ontario Royal Commission (1964), Inquiry into Civil Rights, vol. 2, pp. 725-726 [para. 29].

Counsel:

M.F. Zigayer, for the Crown;

G.N. Carter, for the accused.

This case was heard on May 16, 17 and 18, 1983, at Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, before de WEERDT, J., of the Northwest Territories Supreme Court, who delivered the following judgment on May 25, 1983.

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