James Silver

The appellant was convicted of dangerous operation of a motor vehicle after driving while exhausted, striking a median, and running red lights.

He appealed, arguing the trial judge's reasons were inadequate, failed to explain conflicting evidence, and improperly relied on a police statement not in evidence.

The Superior Court of Justice allowed the appeal, finding the trial judge's conclusory findings and failure to explain the mens rea analysis precluded effective appellate review.

The conviction was quashed and a new trial ordered.

The accused brought a pre-trial Charter application seeking to exclude a loaded firearm, ammunition, and cocaine found during a pat-down search.

The police had detained the accused while investigating a 911 call after he walked into the backyard of the subject property.

The court found the investigative detention and subsequent search for officer safety were lawful, meaning no breaches of ss. 8 or 9 occurred.

However, the police breached ss. 10(a) and 10(b) by failing to fully advise the accused of the reasons for his detention and the informational component of his right to counsel.

Applying the Grant framework under s. 24(2), the court concluded the evidence should be admitted.