NS Supreme Court Dismisses Drug Charges Against the Accused, Citing Charter Rights Violations

Canadian law entitles the accused to their Charter Rights, no matter the nature and circumstances of their alleged crime. The law enforcement officials are always expected to carry out the due process of law without infringing upon any of the accused’s Charter Rights. If any evidence was collected in violation of the Charter Rights, the courts are likely to disqualify such evidence from being presented in the case.

This point was clearly demonstrated in a recent drug case in Nova Scotia. The accused was denied access to his lawyer for almost seven hours. While they were able to recover significant quantities of cocaine and cash from his vehicle and his residence, it was deemed that all the evidence collected in violation of his Charter Rights was inadmissible, and subsequently, the charges against the accused were dismissed.

What are the Charter Rights?

Under Canadian law, the accused in a criminal case is entitled to the following Charter Rights regardless of the nature of the crime.

• The right to be informed of the charges.
• The right to remain silent and not to incriminate oneself.
• The right to retain and instruct counsel without delay.
• The right to be free from arbitrary detention.
• The right of protection from unreasonable searches and seizures of personal property.
• The right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
• The right not to be denied bail without a reasonable cause.
• The right to a fair trial within a reasonable time.
• The right of protection from being tried again for the same offence.

If there were any Charter Rights violations during the arrest, search or investigation, the accused may approach the courts to disqualify such evidence collected from the trial.

Background of the case R. v. Noel, 2025 NSSC 310

• Based on a tip, the police initiated an investigation into Mr. Jean-Noel on January 31, 2022, and subsequently, on February 8, 2022, they obtained a search warrant for his 2014 white Honda Civic and his residence in Cole Harbour, Nova Scotia.
• The police carried out the warrant on February 9, 2022. They arrested Mr. Jean-Noel in his vehicle and conducted a search of his car. The search of his residence followed soon after.
• The police allegedly seized nine plastic bags from the car, each containing 0.8g of cocaine and various amounts of cash. The search of the residence also yielded many more bags of cocaine.
• The police informed the accused of his Charter Rights, including his right to contact his lawyer. Mr. Jean-Noel then requested access to his cell phone so that he could call his lawyer, Mr.  Ian Hutchison.  
• The police officers then obtained the phone’s password from the accused in order to unlock the phone and note down the number of his lawyer. Their intention was to facilitate this phone call at the Prisoner Care Facility.
• However, at the Prisoner Care Facility, the duty counsel room was already in use, and there were more people waiting to use it. While there were other rooms at the facility where such calls could be arranged, the officer-in-charge was not aware of this option.
• Finally, after seven hours, Mr. Jean-Noel was allowed to speak to his lawyer, Mr.  Ian Hutchison.
• The accused later approached the Nova Scotia Supreme Court requesting the dismissal of the drug charges, citing the violation of his Charter Rights.

Key Observations

In dismissing the charges laid against the accused in R. v. Noel, 2025 NSSC 310, the Court made the following observations.  

• It is clear that the police had every intention of upholding the Charter Rights of the accused. They verbally informed the accused of his Charter Rights. He acknowledged them and confirmed that he wished to contact his lawyer.
• The court is convinced that the accused’s Charter Rights were clearly violated in this case. Section 10 (b) of the Charter Rights is clear and unambiguous: “Everyone has the right on arrest or detention to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right”. The delay of 7 hours is a clear violation of the accused’s right to “retain and instruct counsel without delay.”
• The court observed that admitting the evidence collected in violation of the Charter Rights would set the wrong precedent and could erode the public’s confidence in the administration of justice over time.
• The court acknowledged that the conduct of the law enforcement officials was not in bad faith or malicious in nature. Nonetheless, the delay of seven hours is unjustifiable in this case.
• The arrest was not spontaneous or dynamic; rather, it was planned well in advance. Therefore, the police should have made sufficient arrangements to facilitate the accused’s phone call to his lawyer within a reasonable amount of time.
• Since there is a clear breach of the accused’s Charter Rights, all the evidence thus collected has to be excluded as per Section 24 (2) of the Charter.
• Since the evidence has become inadmissible, the charges against the accused are dismissed.

Conclusion:

The phrase “without delay” in Section 10 (b) of the Charter Rights made it very clear that the unjustifiable delay in allowing the accused to contact his lawyer is a breach of his Charter Rights. This was not a spontaneous arrest, executed in haste. The whole thing was planned ahead of time, and an officer was even assigned the task of facilitating the accused’s phone call with his lawyer. Still, there was a failure in meeting this obligation, forcing the court to disqualify the evidence and dismiss the charges against the accused.

How can our criminal lawyer help you?

The above case is a clear example of the difference a good criminal lawyer can make in your case, regardless of all the evidence stacked against you. If you are fighting such criminal charges, ensure that you have our experienced and knowledgeable criminal lawyers defending you in court. Get in touch with our criminal lawyer today to ensure that you have the best legal representation available in your case.

Reach out to our criminal defence team at 905-405-0199 for a consultation