Ontario Criminal

Charter of Rights

Accused had no extra right to privacy being passenger in vehicle

Accused was passenger in vehicle that was stopped by police pursuant to drug investigation and sought to exclude drugs found in vehicle and in satchel he was carrying. Police used confidential information, recorded conversations, text messages and surveillance evidence that accused and others were in possession of crystal methamphetamine, heroin and other drugs for purpose of trafficking them to another person. Evidence admissible. Accused had no extra right to privacy being passenger in vehicle. Police had ample evidence to make arrest and search of vehicle and satchel was lawful search pursuant to arrest. Court found as well that even if Charter breach was found it would not have excluded evidence considering all evidence that police had against accused breach of his rights would not be serious. Crystal methamphetamine was addictive drug, having corrosive effect on community. Police investigation was very professional and competent and public rightly expects to be protected by police and courts.

R. v. Panagos (Jul. 18, 2013, Ont. S.C.J., P.B. Hambly J., File No. CJ 7473) 108 W.C.B. (2d) 122.

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

A Law Society of Ontario tribunal has ruled that a lawyer charged with offences related to child pornography should not be subject to an interlocutory suspension. Do you agree with this decision?