Established Areas of Privacy: Difference between revisions
Tag: wikieditor |
No edit summary Tag: wikieditor |
||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
{{reflist|2}} | {{reflist|2}} | ||
== | ==Zones of Privacy== | ||
* [[Established Areas of Territorial Privacy]] | |||
* [[Established Areas of Informational Privacy]] | |||
* [[Established Areas of Personal Privacy]] | |||
Revision as of 19:28, 3 August 2023
| This page was last substantively updated or reviewed July 2021. (Rev. # 86917) |
Introduction
Courts have set out specific rules and principles when dealing with certain situations where privacy interests have been found. Those circumstances include searches of persons, residences, vehicles, storage, and more recently electronic devices.
A person can have a reasonable expectation of privacy "related to contraband."[1]
- ↑
R v AM, 2008 SCC 19 (CanLII), [2008] SCJ No 19, per LeBel J, at para 73
R v Butters, 2014 ONCJ 228 (CanLII), 311 CCC (3d) 516, per Paciocco J, at para 26
Personal Zones
- Bags, Pockets, Purses
Bags and pockets are protected.[1]
An individual who attends a hospital for medical treatment is entitled to expect that his clothing will be held by the facility until discharged. Hospitals have been identified as an area of concern for the protection of privacy. [2]
- Bodily Samples
DNA samples taken as part of a previous sentence is not protected by a reasonable expectation of privacy.[3]
- Fingerprints
Fingerprints taken as part of a previous sentence is not protected by a reasonable expectation of privacy.[4]
- Photographs
Photographs taken as part of a previous sentence is not protected by a reasonable expectation of privacy.[5]
- Body Cavity
Strip searches can be humiliating, embarrassing, and degrading for the accused.[6] It is also one of the most extreme forms of search available to police.[7]
- Inmates
A person convicted of a crime has a reduced expectation of privacy.[8] Accordingly, an inmate should have less expectation of privacy in their personal zone of privacy.[9]
- Sound of Voice
There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in the "sound" of one's voice. [10]
- Licences and registration
There is no intrusion on REP where a person is required to present documents proving compliance with a legal requirement in order to have a right of privilege.[11]
- Upskirts and Down Shirts
Recording the cleavage area of a female using a hidden camera intrudes upon the female's expectation of privacy.[12]
- ↑
R v Grant, 2009 SCC 32 (CanLII), [2009] 2 SCR 353, per McLachlin CJ and Charron J
- ↑ R v Pickton, 2006 BCSC 1098 (CanLII), 260 CCC (3d) 232, per Williams J, at para 38 citing R v Calarusso, 1994 CanLII 134 (SCC), [1994] 1 SCR 20, per Lamer C.J. and Cory, McLachlin and Major JJ, at para 70
- ↑ R v DeJesus, 2010 ONCA 581 (CanLII), OJ No 3744, per curiam
- ↑ R v Jackpine (Rodgers), 2006 SCC 15 (CanLII), [2006] 1 SCR 554, 207 CCC (3d) 225, per Charron J, at para 43 - anything taken under the Identification of Criminals Act has no REP
- ↑ Jackpine (Rodgers), ibid., at para 43 - anything taken under the Identification of Criminals Act has no REP
- ↑ R v Golden, 2001 SCC 83 (CanLII), [2001] 3 SCR 679, per Charron J, at para 89
- ↑ R v Flintoff, 1998 CanLII 632 (ON CA), 126 CCC (3d) 321, per Finlayson JA, at para 24
- ↑
R v Briggs, 2001 CanLII 24113 (ON CA), 157 CCC (3d) 38, per Weiler JA, at paras 33 to 35
- ↑ Briggs, ibid.
- ↑
R v Pelland, 1997 CanLII 502 (ON CA), 99 OAC 62, 34 WCB (2d) 356, per curiam - police surreptitiously record the accused voice in a public place
R v Adam et al, 2006 BCSC 1430 (CanLII), per Romilly J, at paras 9 to 11 - use of voice may still violate s. 13 for incrimination. - ↑ R v Hufsky, 1988 CanLII 72, [1988] 1 SCR 621, per Le Dain J
- ↑ R v Jarvis, 2019 SCC 10 (CanLII), [2019] 1 SCR 488, per Wagner CJ