R. v. Erickson, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 649
Kirby Wayne Erickson Appellant
v.
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. Erickson
File No.: 22943.
1993: June 17.
Present: Lamer C.J. and La Forest, L'Heureux‑Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory and McLachlin JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for alberta
Constitutional law ‑‑ Charter of Rights ‑‑ Admissibility of evidence ‑‑ Bringing administration of justice into disrepute ‑‑ Accused hospitalized following car accident ‑‑ Blood samples taken for medical purposes ‑‑ Results of blood‑alcohol analysis obtained by police in violation of accused's right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure ‑‑ Admission of results of blood‑alcohol analysis not bringing administration of justice into disrepute ‑‑ Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 24(2) .
Statutes and Regulations Cited
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , ss. 8 , 24(2) .
APPEAL from a judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal (1992), 125 A.R. 68, 14 W.A.C. 68, 72 C.C.C. (3d) 75, 38 M.V.R. (2d) 260, allowing the Crown's appeal from the accused's acquittal on charges pursuant to ss. 255(3) , 249(4) and 253 (b) of the Criminal Code , and ordering a new trial. Appeal dismissed.
Alexander D. Pringle, Q.C., for the appellant.
Bart Rosborough, for the respondent.
//Lamer C.J.//
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
Lamer C.J. ‑‑ The Court of Appeal, as did the trial judge, found a violation of s. 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , but ordered a new trial on the basis that the trial judge misapplied the principles governing determination under s. 24(2). The accused appealed this latter finding. The Crown did not cross‑appeal the finding below of a s. 8 violation.
The only issue before us is the s. 24(2) determination, and we agree with the result reached in the Court of Appeal. This appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellant: Alexander D. Pringle, Edmonton.
Solicitor for the respondent: Bart Rosborough, Edmonton.
Email this Content