The appellant appealed his conviction, arguing he was arbitrarily detained when an off-duty police officer asked to see the bottom of his boot, which linked him to a series of break and enters.
The trial judge found that the officer calmly approached the appellant and asked to see the tread pattern, and the appellant voluntarily complied without any physical or psychological restraint.
The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings, concluding there was no violation of the appellant's rights under sections 8, 9, and 10 of the Charter.
The appeal was dismissed.
