Marshalling the Data: An Empirical Analysis of Canada’s s. 24(2) Case Law in the Wake of R. v. Grant
Canadian Criminal Law Review, Vol. 15, No. 2, 2011
24 Pages Posted: 23 Feb 2011 Last revised: 15 May 2011
Date Written: February 22, 2011
Abstract
This article canvasses the various reasonable predictions that were made by commentators about the likely impact of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision, R. v. Grant, on constitutional exclusionary patterns under s. 24(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The article then presents empirical data from a study of 100 post-Grant decisions that measures how often, under what circumstances, and what type of, evidence is excluded using the new Grant test. Ultimately, the article argues that Grant is being applied by courts in a manner that is inconsistent with both the reasonable predictions of informed commentators, and the apparent intent of the Grant majority.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Gravity and the Legitimacy of the International Criminal Court
-
International Idealism Meets Domestic-Criminal-Procedure Realism
-
Good Faith, Bad Faith and the Gulf between: A Proposal for Consistent Terminology
-
The Rise and Fall of the Constitutional Exclusionary Rule in the United States
By Mark Cammack
-
The Exclusion of Improperly Obtained Evidence in Greece: Putting Constitutional Rights First
-
Debunking Five Great Myths About the Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule
-
One Problem, Two Paths: A Taiwanese Perspective on the Exclusionary Rule in China
By Yu-jie Chen