R. v. Thiessen (D.F.), (2003) 176 Man.R.(2d) 286 (PC)

• Judge: Giesbrecht, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: September 25, 2003
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (2003), 176 Man.R.(2d) 286 (PC)

R. v. Thiessen (D.F.) (2003), 176 Man.R.(2d) 286 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2003] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. SE.034

Her Majesty The Queen v. Daniel Frank Thiessen (accused)

Indexed As: R. v. Thiessen (D.F.)

Manitoba Provincial Court

Giesbrecht, P.C.J.

September 25, 2003.

Summary:

The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle while disqualified. At issue on this voir dire was the admissibility of two statements made by the accused to the police. The accused alleged that his right to counsel under s. 10(b) of the Charter was infringed at the time of his initial contact with the police and that as a result both statements should be excluded. The voluntariness of the statements was also in issue.

The Manitoba Provincial Court held that both statements were admissible.

Civil Rights - Topic 3604

Detention and imprisonment - Detention - What constitutes detention - The accused, aged 20, was prohibited from driving - His vehicle was found overturned in a ditch - Two police officers attended at his home - The accused told them a different story than they knew he had told a tow truck company - The senior officer said "You're lying, ... so stop fucking around and tell us the truth." - The accused admitted that he was the driver - The officer told the accused that another officer would be back to take a statement and that she wanted him to tell the officer exactly what he had told them - Later, a third officer attended, gave the accused his rights to counsel and took a taped statement - The accused agreed at the outset and end of the statement that it was voluntary - The Manitoba Provincial Court held that the accused was not detained by the first two officers and both of his statements were voluntary.

Criminal Law - Topic 5355

Evidence and witnesses - Confessions and voluntary statements - Whether statement was made freely and voluntarily - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3604 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. L.R.I. and E.T., [1993] 4 S.C.R. 504; 159 N.R. 363; 37 B.C.A.C. 48; 60 W.A.C. 48, refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Therens, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 613; 59 N.R. 122; 40 Sask.R. 122, refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. C.R.H. (2003), 173 Man.R.(2d) 113; 293 W.A.C. 113 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Moran (1987), 21 O.A.C. 257; 36 C.C.C.(3d) 225 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Bazinet (1986), 14 O.A.C. 15; 25 C.C.C.(3d) 273 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Esposito (1985), 12 O.A.C. 350; 24 C.C.C.(3d) 88 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1986), 65 N.R. 244; 15 O.A.C. 237; 24 C.C.C.(3d) 88 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Voss (1989), 33 O.A.C. 190; 50 C.C.C.(3d) 58 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Thompson (1989), 36 O.A.C. 225; 52 C.C.C.(3d) 569 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Smith (1986), 38 Man.R.(2d) 184; 49 C.R.(3d) 210 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Dolynchuk (E.N.) (2002), 168 Man.R.(2d) 262 (Q.B.), dist. [para. 29].

R. v. Ilina (L.) (1997), 122 Man.R.(2d) 175 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Grafe (1987), 22 O.A.C. 280; 36 C.C.C.(3d) 267 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 31].

R. v. Oickle (R.F.), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 3; 259 N.R. 227; 187 N.S.R.(2d) 201; 585 A.P.R. 201, refd to. [para. 65].

R. v. McKay (S.A.) (2003), 175 Man.R.(2d) 121 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 66].

R. v. Goldhart (W.), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 463; 198 N.R. 321; 92 O.A.C. 161; 107 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 75].

R. v. Worrall, [2002] O.J. No. 5076 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 75].

Counsel:

C. Vanderhooft, for the Crown;

S. Legault, for the accused.

This voir dire was heard by Giesbrecht, P.C.J., of the Manitoba Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on September 25, 2003.