Judge excludes drug evidence due to Vancouver police violating suspect's rights
Credit to Author: Keith Fraser| Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2020 00:23:38 +0000
A judge has thrown out drug evidence seized by Vancouver police after finding that a suspect’s rights were violated during a traffic stop.
Evantee Stoney was taken into custody by police on Sept. 12, 2018 when he was a passenger in a vehicle that had been pulled over by police on East Hastings Street.
The police had run the plate number of the vehicle and before the results of the search came through, the vehicle turned and failed to signal.
The search indicated that the registered owner of the vehicle and the vehicle were believed to be involved in drug trafficking.
One of the officers, only identified as Const. Quach in a court ruling, approached the vehicle and after directing Stoney to lower his window, she smelled burning marijuana and saw a marijuana roach in the door well.
Provincial Court Judge Ellen Gordon, the trial judge, noted in her ruling that Quach decided that she had grounds to arrest Stoney for possession of marijuana and deliberately elected not to provide him with his right to a lawyer.
Quach asked Stoney what he was doing in the vehicle and where they were going and he responded by saying that he had just bought some dog food and was going to feed his dogs.
After being advised he was under arrest, Stoney asked to speak to a lawyer. Police found nearly 12 grams of crack cocaine on him, as well as US$20 and C$1,275.
Although Stoney asked for a lawyer, Quach decided to delay implementation of his right to counsel and question him about the money, said the judge.
Quach purported to suggest that she thought she could question individuals about matters not under investigation, but admitted she was in fact investigating the source of the money, said Gordon.
“In any event, I did not believe her evidence on the point that she believed that she could question Mr. Stoney prior to letting him contact counsel. The Charter is older than she is. I have no doubt that she knew her obligations to Mr. Stoney and elected to ignore them.”
Stoney was taken to the nearby police station and searched. Another 105 grams of powder cocaine was found.
He was charged with possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, but the judge concluded that the cocaine seized was not “discoverable” without the rights violation and excluded the evidence.
“In all of the circumstances, the police behaviour was not benign. It was very much malignant.”