R v Le and How Race Factors into the Grant Test
At 10:40 p.m., five men, including Le, were gathered in the backyard of LD’s townhouse when three police officers entered. Prior to this, a police officer talked with the housing security guards regarding an unrelated issue, the guards suggested that LD’s house was a “problem address” and there were concerns of drug trafficking in the backyard. Three police officers entered the yard and confronted the individuals, who, by police admission, appeared to be doing nothing wrong.
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.
The Pitfalls of the SCC’s use of the Waterfield test to Justify New Common Law Police Powers
Within Privacy in Peril, Jochelson and Ireland argue how the Waterfield[2] test has allowed the Supreme Court of Canada to justify new police powers through the common law. It will be argued that while the court has given the police new powers in order to justify intrusions into individual’s privacy, there are also concerns that the court had to assess when determining whether to grant police more powers of search and seizure.
R. v. Poulin: The Rule of Law as a Sword
Mr. Poulin was found guilty of two counts of gross indecency against a minor family member. The sexual offences which he was found guilty of occurred between 1979 and 1987. He was sentenced to a conditional sentence of 2 years less a day due to health issues. A conditional sentence was not available for sexual offences at either the time that Poulin committed the offences or at the time he was sentenced.
