R. v. Caissey

R. v. Caissey
Collection
Supreme Court Judgments
Date
2008-11-20
Neutral citation
2008 SCC 65
Report
[2008] 3 SCR 451
Case number
32436
Judges
McLachlin, Beverley; Binnie, William Ian Corneil; LeBel, Louis; Deschamps, Marie; Fish, Morris J.; Charron, Louise; Rothstein, Marshall
On appeal from
Alberta
Subjects
Criminal law
Notes
SCC Case Information: 32436
Decision Content
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA
Citation: R. v. Caissey, [2008] 3 S.C.R. 451, 2008 SCC 65
Date : 20081120
Docket : 32436
Between:
Lee Michael Caissey
Appellant
and
Her Majesty The Queen
Respondent
- and -
Attorney General of Ontario
Intervener
Coram : McLachlin C.J. and Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Charron and Rothstein JJ.
Reasons for Judgment:
(paras. 1 to 3)
McLachlin C.J. (Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Charron and Rothstein JJ. concurring)
______________________________
R. v. Caissey, [2008] 3 S.C.R. 451, 2008 SCC 65
Lee Michael Caissey Appellant
v.
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent
and
Attorney General of Ontario Intervener
Indexed as: R. v. Caissey
Neutral citation: 2008 SCC 65.
File No.: 32436.
2008: November 20.
Present: McLachlin C.J. and Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Charron and Rothstein JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for alberta
Criminal law — Search warrant — Validity — Reliability of first‑time informant — Information about criminal particulars uncorroborated — Reliability of informant’s information sufficient in context of other factors to justify issuance of search warrant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal (McFadyen, Picard and Martin JJ.A.), [2008] 4 W.W.R. 100, 84 Alta. L.R. (4th) 226, 422 A.R. 208, 415 W.A.C. 208, 227 C.C.C. (3d) 322, [2007] A.J. No. 1342 (QL), 2007 CarswellAlta 1640, 2007 ABCA 380, affirming the accused’s conviction for possession of marihuana. Appeal dismissed.
Daryl J. Royer and Akram Attia, for the appellant.
Ronald C. Reimer and Greg Rice, for the respondent.
Michael Bernstein, for the intervener.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
[1] The Chief Justice — This is an appeal as of right on a question of law.
[2] The dissenting judge advanced the view that only corroboration of some criminal particular of the offence offered the necessary assurance for the issuance of the warrant. This is the question of law that brings the appeal before us. On this issue, we agree with the test adopted by the majority.
[3] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the appellant: Attia Reeves Tensfeldt Snow, Edmonton.
Solicitor for the respondent: Public Prosecution Service of Canada, Edmonton.
Solicitor for the intervener: Attorney General of Ontario, Toronto.