Criminal Law Assignment: Rights, Procedures, and Case Studies

This criminal law assignment addresses several key aspects of the Canadian legal system. It begins by emphasizing the importance of understanding individual legal rights when interacting with law enforcement, particularly regarding privacy and liberty, and the foundation of the legal system. The assignment then explores the importance of cooperation with the police while also outlining situations where cooperation may not be required. The assignment delves into the rights afforded to Canadians upon detention or arrest, as outlined in the Charter, including the right to legal counsel, bail hearings, and habeas corpus. Furthermore, it examines the procedures related to fingerprinting and biometric records for those accused of indictable offenses, highlighting areas for potential improvement. The assignment also explains plea negotiation, outlining its advantages and disadvantages. Finally, the assignment concludes with a case study involving R v. Feeney, exploring the legality of search warrants and the application of Section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, followed by a journal entry reflecting on the search procedures and the balance between law enforcement powers and individual rights.

Running head: CRIMINAL LAW
CRIMINAL LAW
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1
CRIMINAL LAW
Tutorial questions:
1) It is very important and significant to know the legal rights of the individuals in the criminal
law of the country. It is specially needed while dealing with the police in order to protect the
privacy and liberty of an individual. These legal rights provide the basis of the foundation of the
legal system of the country. A failure to understand and use these rights can lead to their erosion
and the individual may fall into deep trouble for such ignorance.
2) It is very important to cooperate with the police because they can ensure the public safety. The
police officers are the first person at a crime scene, and it is their duty to protect the evidence
from being destroyed and tempered. The public must co-operate them by ensuring that they do
not interfere in the crime scene as it may result into loss or destruction of useful evidence. They
must allow the police to conduct body searches when they are accused by police of the same sex
in cases where there is reasonable ground that the accused has drugs on his person.
However, they must not co-operate if the search is to be conducted by police of opposite
case and in cases, there are no probable and valid grounds that the accused has drugs on his
body. Moreover, the accused may not cooperate in a polygraph test or may not give blood, urine,
DNA or breathe samples except in the cases of impaired driving offences.
3) As per the Charter, any Canadian has three rights on being detained or arrested. They are;
 Free legal aid: The Canadians have the right to retain and instruct counsel without
delay in the criminal cases. When the accused cannot afford to hire a lawyer, he
can apply for the legal aid as he has the right to it. The legal services are provided
free of cost to those accused who may not have the capacity to afford.

2
CRIMINAL LAW
 Bail hearing: all the accused persons have a right to tell their story to a judge or
justice of the peace, who will decide the case within 24 hours if they remain in
custody.
 Habeus corpus: when the judge finds that the detention of the accused is not legal,
he may be released, this is called habeus corpus.
4) People who are accused of and charged with indictable offences and are released may be
photographed and finger printed prior to their release. However, when they are acquitted of a
crime, their biometric records are not removed from the police files. This is not addressed by
Federal Government. It is even not possible to have the files destroyed when someone is
arrested by mistake and fingerprinted.
This particular procedure is not perfect and the Federal Government must work upon it.
These finger prints are important for identification and must be destroyed when their acquitted as
if such finger prints are lost and manipulated, the individual’s identity will be exposed to danger.
5) Plea negotiation is a type of bargaining between the accused and the crown prosecutor. It
takes place in the form of an accused pleading guilty and in exchange the Crown may
recommend the court to grant a lesser sentence than the accused might otherwise risk receiving.
The main advantage of plea negotiation is that the defendant receives lighter sentence for
a less severe charge. It takes away the uncertainty of the criminal trial and the defendant can
avoid the maximum sentence.
The disadvantage of it is that there lies no chance of appeal to the decision given by the
court.

3
CRIMINAL LAW
Case study:
1. RMCP did not obtain the search warrant before entering and searching Feeney’s house as
according to the pre- Charter common law, it was valid to do so when the officers have
reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is within the premises, that proper announcement
is made, that officer believes to have reasonable grounds for its arrest and there are reasonable
and probable grounds for such arrest. But such requirements are not made by the police officers
in the given case.
2. The Supreme Court ordered a new trial because the police officers had not obtained the
required search warrant before entering into the house of the accused, hence the search was
illegal. The bloody shirt could not be used as evidence even though blood stains matched the
blood stains as the search procedure was illegal.
3. RCMP had to obtain new evidence for Feeney’s second trial as the evidences collected during
the first trial as the search was illegal as it did not fulfill the conditions provided in the Charter.
In the second trial, RMCP had obtained a set of fingerprints legally from the Calgary
Police Service. Apart from this, it collected blood sample under the warrant issued under section
487.05 of the Criminal Code of Canada.
4. Section 8 of the Charter rights provides for protection against illegal search by the police.
Under this section, in order to search someone’s home, police had to first get a search warrant
called the Feeney warrant. This resulted in the introduction of the telewarrants.

4
CRIMINAL LAW
Journal:
After going through the search procedure, I found that under the Criminal Code of
Canada, much emphasis is given to the search warrant without which the search procedure is
regarded to be invalid. When a police is required to search the home of someone, he must have
the search warrant as per Section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is a compulsory
requirement.
This provision imposes a strict duty on the police to obtain the search warrant first and
then conduct the search procedure. This may hamper the search procedure as much time will be
lost in procuring the warrant by the police and the accused will get time to tamper and destroy
the evidence. Though there is provision for telewarrants, still it is time consuming.
However, if this provision was not there, the policemen will get excessive power in their
hand and can use it as per their discretion which would again make the Canadians subject to
unreasonable search or seizure.
Thus, considering these facts, I feel that the present procedure is perfect as it protects the
right of the Canadian people from being subjected to harassment by unreasonable and unjustified
search or seizure.

5
CRIMINAL LAW
References:
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
R v Feeney, [1997] 2 S.C.R. 13