M. Cullen

The accused applied under ss. 8 and 24(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to exclude documents seized from a correctional facility pursuant to a search warrant seeking handwriting samples connected to alleged tax fraud offences.

The court held that the accused had no reasonable expectation of privacy in documents contained in institutional administrative files, but retained a limited privacy interest in personal papers stored in his jail cell.

Although a correctional officer lawfully seized the accused’s belongings under institutional authority in preparation for the warrant’s execution, the police officer exceeded the scope of the warrant by seizing all property without first determining whether items fell within its terms.

This constituted a breach of s. 8.

Applying the framework in R. v. Grant, the court declined to exclude the evidence, finding the breach unintentional, the privacy impact minimal, and the evidence important to the prosecution.

Sentencing decision for two counts of fraud over $5,000 arising from an extensive tax fraud scheme committed by a tax preparer.

The offender manipulated client tax returns to include false deductions and unmade charitable donations, resulting in more than $17 million in tax evasion and significant financial hardship for numerous victims following reassessments by the Canada Revenue Agency.

The court found numerous aggravating factors under section 380.1 of the Criminal Code, including the magnitude and planning of the fraud, the large number of victims, and the offender’s abuse of trust.

No mitigating factors were identified, particularly given the offender’s lack of remorse and flight from the jurisdiction prior to trial.

Emphasizing general and specific deterrence, the court imposed maximum concurrent custodial sentences and a substantial fine equal to the taxes evaded on one count.

The Crown applied for a ruling that a criminal trial had commenced and that the accused had absconded, seeking authorization to continue the proceedings in the accused’s absence under ss. 475 and 598 of the Criminal Code.

The accused, charged with large-scale tax fraud involving thousands of income tax returns and millions of dollars in understated tax liability, failed to appear for scheduled trial proceedings despite prior compliance with court appearances.

The court found that the accused had deliberately absconded and that the trial had commenced when pre-trial motions were heard following the preferring of the indictment.

The court further held that the accused had waived her election for a jury trial by failing to appear without legitimate excuse.

However, the court concluded that it was not yet in the interests of justice to proceed with the trial in the accused’s absence and adjourned the Crown’s application to allow further efforts to locate the accused.