R. v. Culotta

R. v. Culotta
Collection
Supreme Court Judgments
Date
2018-12-13
Neutral citation
2018 SCC 57
Report
[2018] 3 SCR 597
Case number
38213
Judges
Wagner, Richard; Abella, Rosalie Silberman; Moldaver, Michael J.; Rowe, Malcolm; Martin, Sheilah
On appeal from
Ontario
Notes
SCC Case Information
Decision Content
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA
Citation: R. v. Culotta, 2018 SCC 57, [2018] 3 S.C.R. 597
Appeal heard: December 13, 2018 Judgment rendered: December 13, 2018 Docket: 38213
Between:
Christie Culotta
Appellant
and
Her Majesty The Queen
Respondent
- and -
Criminal Lawyers’ Association and
Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Interveners
Coram: Wagner C.J. and Abella, Moldaver, Rowe and Martin JJ.
Reasons for Judgment: (paras. 1 to 2)
Moldaver J. (Wagner C.J. and Abella, Rowe and Martin JJ. concurring)
R. v. Culotta, 2018 SCC 57, [2018] 3 S.C.R. 597
Christie Culotta Appellant
v.
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent
and
Criminal Lawyers’ Association and
Canadian Civil Liberties Association Interveners
Indexed as: R. v. Culotta
2018 SCC 57
File No.: 38213.
2018: December 13.
Present: Wagner C.J. and Abella, Moldaver, Rowe and Martin JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario
Constitutional law — Charter of Rights — Search and seizure — Right to counsel — Remedy — Exclusion of evidence — Accused convicted of causing accident resulting in bodily harm while operating vessel with blood alcohol level exceeding legal limit — Trial judge finding that accused’s right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure breached when police sealed blood samples taken for medical purposes by hospital lab technician — Trial judge excluding blood samples seized by police but declining to exclude hospital records containing results of blood analysis — Court of Appeal agreeing that some breaches occurred but finding that accused did not invoke right to counsel and therefore that implementational component of that right was not breached — Court of Appeal declining to exclude further evidence on basis that it would not enhance repute of administration of justice — Convictions upheld — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss. 8 , 10 (b), 24(2) .
APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal (Hourigan, Pardu and Nordheimer JJ.A.), 2018 ONCA 665, 142 O.R. (3d) 241, 364 C.C.C. (3d) 191, 30 M.V.R. (7th) 1, [2018] O.J. No. 3946 (QL), 2018 CarswellOnt 12035 (WL Can.), affirming the convictions of the accused for operation of a vessel with a blood alcohol level exceeding the legal limit causing bodily harm. Appeal dismissed, Abella and Martin JJ. dissenting.
Dirk Derstine, for the appellant.
Mabel Lai and Matthew Asma, for the respondent.
Nader R. Hasan and Carlo Di Carlo, for the intervener the Criminal Lawyers’ Association.
Anthony Moustacalis, for the intervener the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
[1] Moldaver J. — A majority of the Court would dismiss the appeal, substantially for the reasons of Justice Nordheimer.
[2] Justices Abella and Martin, in dissent, would allow the appeal, substantially for the reasons of Justice Pardu.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the appellant: Derstine Penman, Toronto.
Solicitor for the respondent: Attorney General of Ontario, Toronto.
Solicitors for the intervener the Criminal Lawyers’ Association: Stockwoods, Toronto.
Solicitor for the intervener the Canadian Civil Liberties Association: Anthony Moustacalis, Toronto.