The Queen v. H.(S.) 2019
After an investigation into a number of arsons, the police obtained a search warrant for the client’s house. When conducting the search the police found two firearms that were allegedly stored contrary to regulations and in a careless manner. The client was charged accordingly. Prior to trial, Mr. van der Walle filed his Notice of Constitutional Argument, alleging that the search warrant was invalid because the police had not provided the issuing Justice of the Peace with sufficient information to amount to reasonable grounds, or “probable cause” as the Americans like to say, that evidence of the offences would be found inside the client’s home. The Crown counsel wisely decided that the defence argument had serious merit and much to his credit decided to “drop” the charges by entering a stay of proceedings on the first morning of trial. Not guilty. No trial necessary.
Related Stories
The King v. C.(R.) 2024
The police began investigating the client after a woman reported to them that two men had come to the door looking for her son. The woman explained that the men had told her son that he owed money from a drug debt and that he would be hurt if he did not pay. When...
The King v. T.(R.) 2024
Police were conducting a surveillance operation on the client and many other members of a suspected drug trafficking group in Vernon, Armstrong, and Enderby. The client was well known to police as he had a lengthy criminal record including no less than 7 prior...
The King v. S.(M.) 2024
A semi truck driver was cruising on the highway just outside of Revelstoke when another vehicle pulled out to pass him on a double solid line. While executing the pass, the other vehicle ended up clipping the semi as it tried to pull back into its lane which resulted...