R. v. Neuman, 2007 ONCA 698

Case Summary

The appellant appealed his convictions and sentences for drug-related offences. He argued that his rights under sections 8 and 9 of the Charter were violated during two separate incidents. For the first incident, the Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's finding of no Charter breach, citing the cumulative effect of informant information and police observations, including an envelope from a hydroponics store and a constantly ringing cell phone. For the second incident, the Court found no error in the trial judge's section 24(2) analysis admitting the evidence despite an assumed section 8 breach. The Court also upheld the finding that the appellant had control of the drugs. The appeal was dismissed.

CITATION: R. v. Neuman, 2007 ONCA 698

DATE: 20071015

DOCKET: C43962

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

WEILER, MOLDAVER and ROULEAU JJ.A.

BETWEEN:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Respondent

and

SHAYNE BRADLEY NEUMAN

Appellant

Counsel: Michael A. McKee for the appellant David E. Rowcliffe for the respondent

Heard: October 5, 2007

On appeal from the conviction entered and the sentence imposed on June 30, 2004 by Justice Geoffrey Griffin of the Ontario Court of Justice.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] In our opinion, the trial judge correctly concluded that there was no violation of the appellant’s ss. 8 and 9 of the Charter in relation to the September 30, 2004 charges. The cumulative effect of the informant information together with the observations of the officer of an envelope from Peterborough Hydroponics, a cell phone that was ringing constantly, air fresheners on the air vents, and, although the appellant was driving an expensive car, the passenger saying that the appellant was not working.

[2] In relation to the February 11, 2005 charges, assuming that the trial judge was correct in finding a breach of the appellant’s s. 8 rights under the Charter, we see no error in his s. 24(2) analysis. We are also satisfied that the trial judge correctly determined that the appellant had control of the drugs in issue.

[3] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

R. v. Neuman, 2007 ONCA 698

Case Summary

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

Judges

Counsel

Parties

Areas of Law

Fact Patterns

Issues