The respondent, Nigel Lafrance, was charged with first-degree murder. In March of 2015, shortly after the killing, police obtained and executed a search warrant on Mr. Lafrance’s home. During this search, police asked Mr. Lafrance to voluntarily provide a statement, to which he agreed. At this time, he was not arrested, nor was he provided his Charter rights. After this interview, Mr. Lafrance consented to providing police with fingerprints, DNA and blood samples, a cell phone and several items of clothing. In April of 2015, Mr. Lafrance was arrested for murder, at which time he was provided his Charter rights and was given an opportunity to consult with counsel. The respondent spoke to a lawyer, was subsequently interviewed, and ultimately confessed to killing the victim. A voir dire was held, during which Mr. Lafrance sought exclusion of the evidence obtained from both the March and April 2015 interviews by alleging breaches of his ss. 8, 9 & 10(b) Charter rights. The trial judge dismissed the application, finding that the accused had not been unlawfully detained during the first interview, that the statements made during both interviews had been voluntary, and that the various searches of the respondent’s property were lawful. Mr. Lafrance was ultimately tried by jury and convicted of the lesser included offence of second-degree murder.Mr. Lafrance appealed his conviction to the Court of Appeal of Alberta, the sole issue being whether the trial judge had engaged in reviewable error by concluding that none of Mr. Lafrance’s Charter rights had been breached. The appellate court concluded that Mr. Lafrance’s s. 10(b) rights, both to be informed of his right to counsel, and to exercise that right, had been breached during both police interviews. Further, the court held that the evidence obtained as a result of the interviews should have been excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter. Ultimately, a majority of the Court of Appeal of Alberta allowed the appeal and remitted the matter for retrial on the charge of second-degree murder, subject to limits on evidence to be tendered by the Crown.Justice Wakeling dissented and would have dismissed the appeal.The Crown appealed the Court of Appeal of Alberta’s decision to the Supreme Court of Canada as of right.

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.

Transcript

Related