Shane Williams v. Her Majesty the Queen
(N.B.) (Criminal) (By Leave)
(Publication ban in case)
Canadian charter (Criminal) - Right to a fair hearing (s. 11(d)), Criminal law, Evidence - Charter of Rights — Right to a fair hearing — Criminal law — Evidence — Application to exclude judicially authorized intercepted communications — How should the investigative necessity inquiry, under ss. 185 and 186 of the Criminal Code, take into account the evidence already obtained by the police — What is the proper role of the designated Crown agent in applications under ss. 185 and 186 of the Criminal Code — What is the legal standard for cross examining a Crown agent on a Garofoli application — Whether s. 11(d) of the Charter is violated where the Chief Justice of a provincial superior court has the unilateral authority to relocate puisne judges to another geographical area of the province — ss. 11(d), 24(2) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.
The applicant and his co accused were charged with numerous offences relating to their involvement in a drug trafficking enterprise. During the pretrial motions, defence counsel applied to exclude judicially authorized intercepted communications from the evidence at trial, arguing the evidence had been obtained in violation of s. 8 of the Charter of Rights. Defence counsel also applied under s. 11(d) of the Charter to disqualify the trial judge from hearing the Charter applications. The trial judge dismissed the application under s. 11(d) of the Charter, and dismissed the R. v. Garofoli,  2 S.C.R. 1421 applications, which resulted in the admission of the intercepted communications. The applicant was convicted and his conviction appeal was dismissed.
- Date modified: