Seizure of Property: Difference between revisions

From Criminal Law Notebook
No edit summary
m Text replacement - "\{\{fr\|([^\}\}]+)\}\}" to "fr:$1"
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{fr|Saisie_de_biens}}
[[fr:Saisie_de_biens]]
{{Currency2|January|2020}}
{{Currency2|January|2020}}
{{LevelOne}}{{HeaderProperty}}
{{LevelOne}}{{HeaderProperty}}

Latest revision as of 14:41, 14 July 2024

This page was last substantively updated or reviewed January 2020. (Rev. # 95577)

Introduction

Property can be seized and then detain by police under the Code in several ways.

Detention can occur as:

For any warrantless seizure of property, the burden is upon the Crown to prove that it did not violate s. 8 of the Charter. To put the burden on the accused "ignores the reality that the Crown is in the best position to know how and why the seizure took place"[1]

Where the police do not seize property and merely make observations, they may still give evidence regarding the items and are not violating the "best evidence rule."[2]

  1. R v Hass, 2005 CanLII 26440 (ON CA), 200 CCC (3d) 81, per Goudge JA, at para 37
  2. R v Pham, 1999 BCCA 571 (CanLII), 139 CCC (3d) 539, per Braidwood JA

Topics

General Seizure Powers

Detention, Access, Disposal of Things Seized Under Section 489 or 487.11

Other Seizure and Detention Powers

See Also