Case Brief: “R v. Kang-Brown”


Add to cart
Essay #: 062968
Total text length is 3,627 characters (approximately 2.5 pages).

Excerpts from the Paper

The beginning:
Case Brief: "R v. Kang-Brown"
Names of the Parties
The appellant:
Kang-Brown ; the respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; and interveners: Attorney General of Ontario, Attorney General of Quebec, Attorney General of British Columbia, Criminal Lawyers’ Association (Ontario) and Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
Case History
This case was heard by the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench and the Alberta Court of Appeal before going to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Facts of the Case
Three RCMP officers, on January 25, 2002, were staking out the Calgary Greyhound bus terminal in plain clothes, part of the RCMP “
” program, which monitors the traveling public in an effort to identity and arrest drug couriers and other individuals...
The end:
.....upon reasonable and probably grounds. Here, the police action was not based on a reasonable suspicion but on speculation.
It is first necessary to determine whether the accused had a reasonable expectation of privacy in light of the totality of the circumstances. If the accused had a reasonable expectation of privacy, the court must then determine what grounds were required for the use of the dog to be authorized. If the standard is met, then the dog must still be used in a reasonable manner. Only then, would the search be reasonable under section 8 of the Charter.
R. v. Kang-Brown. (2008). Judgments of the Supreme Court of
Canada. Retrieved October 7, 2010, from