Reinforcing the Balance – R v Rafilovich 2019 SCC 51
Like the tock to a metronome’s tick, the rights of the accused are to serve as a balance, a counterweight, a complement to the rights and permissions of the Crown (or state). Nowhere is this more necessary than in the arena of criminal law. This idea is fleshed out in the case of R v Rafilovich 2019 SCC 51. A brief overview of the facts is helpful to set the stage, but it’s not necessary to dive in in full for the issue at hand.
R. v Rafilovich: Does crime pay?
The case of R. v Rafilovich is an examination by the Supreme Court of important legal issues relating to judicially returned funds that are used by an accused to pay for their legal defence. In this case, Rafilovich was arrested for possession of cocaine for the purposes of trafficking. During a search of Rafilovich’s apartment and vehicle, police found and seized approximately $47,000 of cocaine and $42,000 in cash.
Picture This…Thinking about R. v. Rafilovich
Picture this… you, a cocaine trafficker, are out one night, driving through LA. It’s the 1960s, and you just finished watching your favourite television show with your favourite actor, Rick Dalton. Then, the police arrest you. They search your house, as to be expected, and find $42,000 in cash, and $47,000 in cocaine, among other things.
R v Wasserman: The Appeal
On March 30, 2013, the appellant, in this case, was arrested by the police. The appellant was subject to a lawful traffic stop for improper display of a temporary licence plate where the police conducted a search of his vehicle and found drugs. The appellant was charged with possession of cocaine and ecstasy for the purpose of trafficking and possession of the proceeds of crime.
