J. Stilman

The appellant appealed her conviction for impaired operation of a motor vehicle, arguing the trial judge erred in failing to exclude evidence obtained in violation of s. 10(a) of the Charter.

The trial judge had found a s. 10(a) breach because the officer delayed advising the appellant of the reasons for her detention for a few minutes for safety reasons, but declined to exclude the evidence under s. 24(2).

The Summary Conviction Appeal Court upheld the trial judge's application of the Grant framework, agreeing that the officers' observations of impairment were inevitably discoverable and not the result of compelled participation in a sobriety test.

The appeal was dismissed and the conviction upheld.

Media organizations applied for access to previously sealed informations to obtain (ITOs) relating to a production order and search warrant issued during a criminal investigation.

The accused sought continuation of a publication ban, arguing that publication of intercepted communications referenced in the ITOs would compromise his right to a fair trial on an extortion charge.

Applying the Dagenais/Mentuck test, the court held that the accused failed to demonstrate a real and serious risk to trial fairness, given existing publicity, the passage of time before trial, jury instructions, and the challenge for cause process.

A third party mentioned in the ITOs argued that publication would damage his reputation, but the court held that third parties generally lack standing to seek publication bans absent exceptional circumstances.

The court concluded that the open court principle prevailed and lifted the remaining publication bans.