< Canadian Criminal Procedure and Practice < Search and Seizure

General Principles

A telewarrant is a warrant that is requested by telephone or other means of telecommunication to a designated justice. This circumvents the requirement that a peace officer appear in person before a justice of the peace to obtain the warrant.

Under s. 487.1(1), a peace officer may only apply for a telewarrant where he believes an indictable offence has been committed and it would be “impractical to appear personally”.[1]

The applicant must be a "peace officer" as defined in s. 2 of the Code.[2]

The information sworn to must include:[3]

  1. description of the circumstances that make it impractical for the informant to appear personally to obtain the warrant;
  2. a description of the indictable offence that is alleged
  3. a description of the place to be searched;
  4. a description of the item(s) to be seized;
  5. the grounds for believing t hat the item(s) will be located within the place;
  6. details on any prior applications with respect to the same matter.
  1. ↑ s.487.1(1)
  2. ↑ Timberwolf Log Trading Ltd. v. British Columbia, 2011 BCSC 142 (CanLII) - applicant not a peace officer
  3. ↑ 487.1(4)

Impracticable to Attend in Person

The applicant must state the reasons it is "impracticable" to make an application in person before either a judge or justice of the peace. This includes what reasonable efforts were made to make personal appearance possible.[1]

It is often expected that the applicant will verify that a local JP is not available.[2] It has been suggested that where there is a "possibility" that a judge may be available, then the applicant should make an enquiry.[3]

Where the applicant does not state the reasons or efforts made, it may invalidate the warrant.[4] This will be seen, for example, where the police are found to be hiding the real reason of timeliness in seeking a nighttime warrant.[5]

The term "practicable" in this context "means something less than impossible and imports a large measure of practicality, what may be termed common sense."[6]

  1. ↑ e.g. R. v. Adansi, 2008 ONCJ 144 (CanLII) at para. 74
    R. v. Breland, 2000 ABPC 110 (CanLII)
    R. v. Brick (Alta. Q.B.) 98 A.R. 208
    R. v. Sattelberger, [1995] 105 Man. R. (2d) 252 (Q.B.) at para. 36
    R. v. Le, 2009 BCCA 14 (CanLII) - failed to give reason for not checking on avail. of JP
  2. ↑ R. v. Mui Thi Nguyen, 2006 BCPC 398 (CanLII) at para. 97
  3. ↑ R. v. Koprowski, 2005 BCPC 657 (CanLII) at para. 13
  4. ↑ e.g. See R. v. Ling, 2009 BCCA 70 (CanLII)
    Adansi -- warrant invalidated
    Ling 2009 BCCA 70 at para. 26, 27 Le at para. 26
  5. ↑ e.g. Le at para. 26
  6. ↑ R. v. Erickson, 2003 BCCA 693 (CanLII) at para. 33

Accepted Reasons

Acceptable reasons for applying for a telewarrant:

  • distance to reach the Judge or Justice of the Peace;[1]
  • application to be made outside court hours;[2]
  • short time limit to obtain the warrant. (e.g. when 4 hour time limit on blood sample)[3]
  1. ↑ R. v. Martens, 2004 BCSC 1450 (CanLII) at para. 221
    R. v. Phillips, 2004 BCSC 1797 (CanLII) at para. 24
  2. ↑ R. v. Bui and Trac, 2004 BCPC 277 (CanLII) at para. 20
    Martens at para. 221
    R. v. Murphy, 2010 ONSC 595 (CanLII) at para. 23-39
  3. ↑ R. v. Pedersen, 2004 BCCA 64 (CanLII) at para. 23
This article is issued from Wikibooks. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.