Steven K. Stauffer

The accused was charged with drug trafficking and weapons offences following a traffic stop initiated based on a tip from a confidential informant.

During the stop, the accused was arrested for possession of a prohibited weapon and subsequently subjected to a roadside strip search, which yielded cocaine.

The accused brought an application to exclude the evidence under s. 24(2) of the Charter, alleging breaches of his ss. 8, 9, 10(a), and 10(b) rights.

The court found that while the initial detention and arrest were lawful, the roadside strip search violated s. 8, and the police breached ss. 10(a) and 10(b) by failing to promptly advise the accused of the reasons for his detention and delaying his access to counsel.

Applying the Grant framework, the court concluded that the admission of the evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

The evidence was excluded, and the accused was acquitted.

The Crown appealed a 5.5-month conditional sentence imposed on the respondent for the sexual assault of an intoxicated, sleeping complainant.

The trial judge had imposed the conditional sentence largely to avoid collateral immigration consequences that would trigger the respondent's deportation.

The Superior Court of Justice allowed the appeal, finding the trial judge erred in principle by failing to properly weigh deterrence and denunciation, and by using immigration consequences to impose a sentence outside the appropriate range.

The sentence was varied to 5.5 months of incarceration, though the respondent was not required to serve further time as the conditional sentence had already been completed.