Case information

Charter of Rights — Criminal law — Evidence — Admissibility — Restrictive judicial authorization not complied with — Motion to exclude all wiretap evidence dismissed — Whether Quebec Court of Appeal erred in refusing to review trial judge’s decision not to exclude all wiretap evidence, having regard to fact that there was deliberate non-compliance with interception terms and conditions.

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.

SEALING ORDER

On October 31, 2008, in the course of a police investigation into money laundering by the Hells Angels motorcycle gang, a wiretap authorization relating to 50 persons was issued to allow interceptions at more than 130 locations, including the offices of Groupe Ste-Marie, a business comprised of, among others, Dax and Mélanie Ste-Marie. However, the wiretap at Groupe Ste-Marie’s offices was subject to a restriction on live surveillance. Because of an anomaly caused by the equipment belonging to the Videotron firm, that condition was not complied with. The members of Groupe Ste-Marie were subsequently charged with laundering proceeds of crime and conspiracy to launder proceeds of crime. The prosecution selected 178 interceptions to serve as evidence, including 5 that were covered by the restriction on live surveillance. On January 18, 2016, the judge ordered the disclosure of evidence of all conversations intercepted by Videotron at Groupe Ste-Marie’s office. On January 23, the accused moved for a mistrial or for the exclusion of all wiretap evidence. The Court of Québec judge found that while the restrictive judicial authorization had not been complied with, it would not be in the best interest of justice for all the conversations to be excluded in the circumstances of the case. He therefore dismissed the motion, but he reserved his discretion to exclude certain sessions when the evidence was presented, in case there were irregularities. He later convicted the accused of conspiracy to launder proceeds of crime, laundering proceeds of crime and criminal organization offences. The Quebec Court of Appeal granted the motions for leave to appeal and dismissed the appeals.

---

---