Summary

37214

Erik Reid v. Her Majesty the Queen

(Ontario) (Criminal) (By Leave)

Keywords

None.

Summary

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Charter — Criminal law — Evidence — Privilege — Informants — Applicant charged after police executed search warrant for storage locker and found numerous stolen handguns — Applicant argued storage locker search was unlawful — Information to obtain warrant was provided by confidential informant and was redacted — Crown had provided applicant summary of redacted information, which trial judge found to be adequate — Whether summary of redacted information struck appropriate balance between right to make full answer and defence and preservation of informant privilege — Whether applicant entitled to challenge for first time on appeal constitutional validity of step six of procedure set out by this Court in R. v. Garofoli, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1421, by which trial judge is provided unredacted information and applicant provided summary thereof.

The applicant, Mr. Erik Reid, was charged after police executed a search warrant for his storage locker and found numerous stolen handguns. At trial, Mr. Reid argued that the search of the locker was unlawful and that the guns should thus be excluded. The Information to Obtain the warrant (ITO) consisted of information provided by a confidential informant. The ITO provided to Mr. Reid was redacted of the information provided by the informant. At trial, the Crown acknowledged that the redacted ITO could not support the issuance of the warrant to search the storage locker and provided Mr. Reid a summary of the redacted information, which the trial judge found to be adequate. Ultimately, Mr. Reid was convicted of 37 firearms offences and sentenced to nine years’ imprisonment after 36 months’ credit for 31 and one-half months’ time spent in pre-disposition custody. On appeal, Mr. Reid sought to challenge the constitutional validity of step six of the procedure set out by this Court in R. v. Garofoli, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1421, which he argued offended the right to life, liberty and security of the person under s. 7 of the Charter. (Under step six of the Garofoli procedure, the trial judge is provided with the unredacted ITO and the applicant with a summary of the redactions.) Mr. Reid argued that the trial record permitted the step six issue to be fairly and fully addressed for the first time on appeal. The Court of Appeal however disagreed. It declined to hear or decide the constitutional challenge, and dismissed the appeal against convictions. While the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal against convictions, it allowed in part the appeal against sentence. The nine-year sentence was reduced to eight years, one month to account for pre-disposition custody.

Lower Court Rulings

June 13, 2013
Ontario Superior Court of Justice

Applicant convicted of 37 firearms offences.
June 20, 2013
Ontario Superior Court of Justice

Nine-year sentence imposed.
June 30, 2016
Court of Appeal for Ontario

C59670, 2016 ONCA 524
Appeal from conviction dismissed but appeal from sentence allowed in part (nine-year sentence reduced to eight years, one month to account for pre-disposition custody).
 

loading