Case information

None.

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.

Charter of Rights - Constitutional law - Right to counsel - Investigative detention - Whether the words “without delay” in s. 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms have a different meaning in the context of an investigative detention than an arrest - Whether the Appellant’s rights under s. 10(b) of the Charter were infringed when he was detained by the police for investigative purposes and questioned without being advised of his right to counsel.

The Appellant was held under investigative detention outside a store by a police officer. The officer was exploring the Appellant’s connection to an on-going fraud being committed by another man inside the store. The man inside the store was attempting to use a gift certificate believed to have been purchased with a stolen credit card. The Appellant was questioned. Some of his answers were incriminating. The officer received information over his radio linking the Appellant’s vehicle to the earlier incident in which the stolen credit card was used to buy gift certificates. The officer arrested the Appellant and advised him of his right to counsel and his right to silence. The Appellant and his purse were searched. The officer found incriminating evidence. The Appellant made more incriminating statements. An issue arose before trial concerning the Appellant’s right to counsel during the investigative detention and the admissibility of the evidence. The Charter application to exclude statements and physical evidence was dismissed. The Appellant was convicted of two counts of possession of property under $5000 obtained by crime and one count of possession of a stolen credit card. On appeal, the summary conviction appeals from convictions and sentence were dismissed and the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.