Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 24 APRIL 2013

Context, Content And Privacy In Warrantless Searches Of Cell Phone And Cameras

A discussion on a recent case, where it was considered whether the constitutionality of a warrantless search and seizure of a camera that was alleged to have been used to surreptitiously film a child in the accused's residence as well as the seizure of the accused's computer.

CanadaPrivacy

Context and content matters to the assessment of reasonable expectations of privacy in criminal law matters.

Recently, in R. v. B. (C.), 2013 CarswellOnt 3851 (SCJ), P. Smith J. considered the constitutionality of a warrantless search and seizure of a camera that was alleged to have been used to surreptitiously film a child in the accused's residence as well as the seizure (but not search) of the accused's computer.

According to the allegations, the complainant (a minor) found a video camera in her bedroom containing naked pictures of herself. The police were called to a relative's house and were showed the pictures on the video camera. While the police were at the relative's house, the accused showed up and identified the camera. The police took the camera.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from