R. V. Grant Case Summary

To begin, the events that took place in this Supreme Court Case occurred on November 17, 2003 involving Donnohue Grant and three Toronto Police Officers, two of which were dressed in plain clothes and in an unmarked car. The area had a history of student assaults, robberies and drug offences which was one of the main reasons for the obvious police presence in the vicinity. The accused was walking down the street very close to school when officer’s Worrall and Forde passed by in their unmarked car. Grant stared at the officers as they drove by him while fidgeting with his coat and pants in a particular way which caught the attention of undercover Worrall and Forde. Officer’s Worrall and Forde then informed officer Gomes that he should have a chat with the suspicious accused. To continue, Officer Gomes then approached the accused and was the first to converse with Grant. Officer Gomes stood on the sidewalk directly in the middle of the accused’s path in which

v. Grant the appellant is Donnohue Grant and Her Majesty The Queen. The Defence for Mr. Grant argues was he was detained before he made his inculpatory statements. He believed his liberty to remain or leave was taken away by the police while they conducted the stop. The Officers were blocking his forward path by standing in front of him, and as well as informing him of keeping his hands in in front of him. This was breaching his Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms section 8, 9, and 10(b). This was the argument of psychological detainment in where the person felt he had no choice by the actions of the police. When Grant said he had a bag of marijuana on him they still didn’t caution him and kept asking questions relieving that he admitted to having a firearm in which they searched him than read him his rights. The next argument was about the trafficking charge. Mr. Grant argued that he didn’t change possession of the firearm or hands it didn’t qualify the word and definition of