Arrest and Detention: Difference between revisions
m Text replacement - "'''([A-Z][a-z]+ [A-Z][a-z]+)'''<br>" to "; $1" |
m Text replacement - "(R v [A-Z][a-z]+ \([A-Z]\.[A-Z]\.\))," to "''$1''," |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
The transition from investigative detention to arrest and search is a fluid and dynamic process in situations such a traffic stop. It is not to be segmented into discrete parts.<ref> | The transition from investigative detention to arrest and search is a fluid and dynamic process in situations such a traffic stop. It is not to be segmented into discrete parts.<ref> | ||
see R v Schrenk (C.A.), [http://canlii.ca/t/29ft9 2010 MBCA 38] (CanLII), 255 Man.R. (2d) 12{{perMBCA|Steel JA}}<br> | see ''R v Schrenk (C.A.)'', [http://canlii.ca/t/29ft9 2010 MBCA 38] (CanLII), 255 Man.R. (2d) 12{{perMBCA|Steel JA}}<br> | ||
R v Amofa (R.), [http://canlii.ca/t/flb79 2011 ONCA 368] (CanLII), 282 O.A.C. 114{{perONCA|Blair JA}}{{at|19}}<br> | R v Amofa (R.), [http://canlii.ca/t/flb79 2011 ONCA 368] (CanLII), 282 O.A.C. 114{{perONCA|Blair JA}}{{at|19}}<br> | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
Revision as of 17:09, 16 January 2019
Introduction
The police powers of detention and arrest are some of the most important powers available to a peace officer in their investigation of criminal activity. It is also some of the most invasive powers upon a person's liberty. This is a classic issue of procedural law that circumscribes the peace officers authority in these matters.
These chapters cover not only the powers of police to detain or arrest, but also the right a person has when the police engage in such conduct and remedies for breaches of those rights.
The transition from investigative detention to arrest and search is a fluid and dynamic process in situations such a traffic stop. It is not to be segmented into discrete parts.[1]
In general terms, the law should not "unduly hamper" the police in criminal investigations.[2]
- State Agency
Arrest and detention by private security on the basis of committing a criminal offence and then delivery to the police does not amount to state conduct.[3]
- ↑
see R v Schrenk (C.A.), 2010 MBCA 38 (CanLII), 255 Man.R. (2d) 12, per Steel JA
R v Amofa (R.), 2011 ONCA 368 (CanLII), 282 O.A.C. 114, per Blair JA, at para 19
- ↑ R v Hart, 2012 NLCA 61 (CanLII), per Barry JA appealed to 2014 SCC 52 (CanLII), per Moldaver J
- ↑
R v Dell, 2005 ABCA 246 (CanLII), per Fruman JA and Cote JA
See also Charter Applications#State Agent
Topics
- Investigative Detention
- Warrant Arrests
- Warrantless Arrests
- Arrest Procedure
- Exclusion of Evidence Under Section 24(2) of the Charter
- Waiver of Charter Rights
- Initial Post-Charge Detention