Voir la source de Consentement à une fouille

[[en:Consent_Search]]
{{Currency2|janvier|2019}}
{{LevelZero}}{{HeaderWarrantless}}
==Principes généraux==
Une perquisition avec consentement est une forme de [[perquisition sans mandat|perquisition sans mandat]].
Une perquisition effectuée avec un consentement valable est légale.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Chang|4s1h|2003 ABCA 293 (CanLII)|180 CCC (3d) 330}}{{TheCourtABCA}}{{atL|4s1h|28}}</ref>

Valid consent exists where the following is present:<ref> 
{{CanLIIRP|Wills|1npnl|1992 CanLII 2780 (ON CA)|70 CCC (3d) 529}}{{perONCA-H|Doherty JA}}{{atp|69}}<br>
{{CanLIIRx|Cooper|2f7rc|2011 ABQB 17 (CanLII)}}{{perABQB|Kenny J}}{{atsL|2f7rc|35| to 41}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Borden|1frrd|1994 CanLII 63 (CSC)|[1994] 3 RCS 145}}{{perSCC|Iacobucci J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Rutten|1mldp|2006 SKCA 17 (CanLII)|205 CCC (3d) 504}}{{perSKCA|Smith JA}}{{atL|1mldp|35}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Kennedy|53db|2000 BCCA 362 (CanLII)|147 CCC (3d) 144}}{{perBCCA|Braidwood JA}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Roy|2cz4d|2010 BCCA 448 (CanLII)|261 CCC (3d) 62}}{{perBCCA|Lowry JA}}<br>
</ref>
#There was a consent, either express or implied;
#The consenting party has the authority to give the consent;
#Consent was voluntary and not the product of police oppression, coercion or other external conduct negating freedom to choose not to consent;
#The consenting party knew of the nature of the police conduct to which he or she was being asked to consent;
#The consenting party knew they had the ability to refuse the search;
#The consenting party was aware of the potential consequences of giving the consent, including a general understanding of the jeopardy resulting from the police conduct about which the consent was being sought.

; Voluntary
For consent to be valid it must be voluntary and informed. Voluntary search requires that the consent to be given without coercion.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Bergauer-Free|253pd|2009 ONCA 610 (CanLII)|68 CR (6th) 362}}{{perONCA|Moldaver JA}}{{atL|253pd|57}}<br>
Voir également {{CanLIIRP|Goldman|1tx9c|1979 CanLII 60 (CSC)|[1980] 1 RCS 976}}{{perSCC-H|Mclntyre J}}{{Atp|1005}}
</ref>

; Informed consent
Informed consent to a search requires the accused to be aware of the right to refuse the search and the consequences of consenting to the search.<ref> 
{{supra1|Wills}} <br>
{{CanLIIRP|Borden|1frrd|1994 CanLII 63 (CSC)| CR (4th) 147}}{{perSCC|Iacobucci J}} at 158 <br>
{{CanLIIRP|SS|205d8|2008 ONCA 578 (CanLII)|176 CRR (2d) 68}}{{perONCA-H|Doherty JA}}{{AtsL|205d8|48|, 52}}<br>
cf. {{CanLIIRP|Lupien|1nmsf|1995 CanLII 5211 (QC CA)|(1995) 68 QAC 253 (CA)}}{{perQCCA|Rothman JA}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Blackstock|232ch|1997 CanLII 14495 (ON CA)|(1997) 10 CR 5th 385 (ONCA)}}{{TheCourtONCA}}<br>
''US v Drayton'' 536 US 194 (2002) - police need not inform of right as long as there was no coercion, intimidation, or confrontation<br>
</ref>The party expressing "consent must be possessed of the requisite informational foundation for a true relinquishment of the right.  A right to choose requires not only the volition to prefer one option over another, but also sufficient available information to make the preference meaningful.”<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Borden|1frrd|1994 CanLII 63 (CSC)|[1994] 3 RCS 145}}{{perSCC|Iacobucci J}}</ref>

; Notice of Right to Refuse
The cases are divided on whether the police need to give clear instructions on the right to refuse. <ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Rutten|1mldp|2006 SKCA 17 (CanLII)|205 CCC (3d) 504}}{{perSKCA|Smith JA}}{{atsL|1mldp|39| to 44}}, the court stated that permission to enter to search a dwelling must include information on the person's right to refuse<br></ref>
Courts opposed to the requirement, state that the standard of informed consent is less than the informational component of s. 10(b). The police need not tell an accused who is not in custody of the right to refuse consent. However, a failure to do so may result in a lack of informed consent.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Lewis|4q25|1998 CanLII 7116 (ON CA)| (1998) 122 CCC (3d) 481}}{{perONCA-H|Doherty JA}}<br>
{{supra1|Blackstock}}{{atsL|232ch|3| to 5}}
</ref>
Where the accused is in custody, there is a onus to inform the accused of their right to refuse.<ref>
{{supra1|Blackstock}}{{atsL|232ch|3| to 5}}
</ref>

; Waiver
The Crown must establish that the accused right to be searched was waived clearly and unequivocally.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Collins|1ftnc|1987 CanLII 84 (CSC)|[1987] 1 RCS 265}}{{perSCC|Lamer J}}</ref>  
However, where the accused is given access to counsel there is a presumption of informed consent unless the accused shows otherwise.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Williams|1dgtn|1992 CanLII 295 (BC SC)|76 CCC 385 (BCSC)}}{{perBCSC|Melnick J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Deprez|gbrwh|1994 CanLII 16612 (MB CA)| (1994) 95 CCC 29 (MBCA)}}{{perMBCA|Scott CJ}}<br>
</ref>

; Effect of Consent
Once consent is given there is no future expectation of privacy.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Arp|1fqq7|1998 CanLII 769 (CSC)|[1998] 3 RCS 339}}{{perSCC|Cory J}} at 90</ref>

; Invalidating consent
A threat to get a warrant when the officer knows there is no grounds to do so can invalidate consent to search.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|O’Connor|1cgld|2002 CanLII 3540 (ON CA)|170 CCC (3d) 365}}{{perONCA|O'Connor ACJ}}{{AtsL|1cgld|74|, 75}}<br>
</ref> 
However, it is not necessary the police ever let the accused know that there is no grounds to search the item for which consent is sought.<ref>
{{ibid1|O’Connor}}{{atL|1cgld|75}}</ref>

; Coercion
Coercion will exist where there are threats made should the accused refuse to give consent.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Bergauer-Free|253pd|2009 ONCA 610 (CanLII)|68 CR (6th) 362}}{{perONCA|Moldaver JA}} - police threaten to bring in the canine unit should consent be refused. This was found to be "colorably lawful coercion"<br>
</ref>

; Honest But Mistaken Belief in Consent
Police are not permitted to justify a warrantless search on the basis that they had a mistaken belief in consent.<ref>
{{supra1|Wills}} (“where the Crown relies on the consent of an individual as authorization for a seizure and fails to establish the validity of that consent, then the seizure cannot be brought within s. 8 based upon the police officer’s perception of the validity of the consent”)<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Reeves|hphzk|2017 ONCA 365 (CanLII)|350 CCC (3d) 1}}{{perONCA|LaForme JA}}{{atL|hphzk|71}}<br>
</ref>

; Burden
The burden is upon the Crown to prove consent on a balance of probabilities.<ref>
{{supra1|Wills}}{{atp|353}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Colson|1vdtv|2008 ONCA 21 (CanLII)|88 OR (3d) 752}}{{perONCA|Blair JA}}{{atL|1vdtv|23}} leave denied [2008] SCCA No 101<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Simon|205d8|2008 ONCA 578 (CanLII)|176 CRR (2d) 68}}{{perONCA-H|Doherty JA}}{{atL|205d8|49}}<br>
{{supra1|Rutten}}{{atL|1mldp|36}}<br>
</ref>
{{reflist|2}}

===Consent to Enter Residence to Arrest===

Consent entry for the purpose of arrest is an exception to the rule from {{CanLIIRP|Feeney|1fr1w|1997 CanLII 342 (CSC)|[1997] 2 RCS 13}}{{perSCC-H|Sopinka J}} requiring a "Feeney warrant" to enter a residence for arrest.<ref>
{{CanLIIRPC|Tymkin v Ewatski et al|g2mxs|2014 MBCA 4 (CanLII)|306 CCC (3d) 24}}{{perMBCA|Monnin JA}}
</ref>

When executing a warrant, police may enter premises by consent where there exists:<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|RMJT|g6px4|2014 MBCA 36 (CanLII)|306 CCC (3d) 24}}{{perMBCA|Cameron JA}}{{atL|g6px4|46}}<br>
{{supra1|Tymkin v Ewatski}}{{atL|g2mxs|89}}<br>
</ref>
# it must be given by someone who has a privacy interest in the premises 
# the consent must be an informed one

{{Reflist|2}}

===Consent to Enter Residence to Search===
Consent to search a residence is guided by the "reasonable expectation of privacy."<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|RMJT|g6px4|2014 MBCA 36 (CanLII)|306 CCC (3d) 24}}{{perMBCA|Cameron JA}}{{atL|g6px4|48}}<br></ref>
A person who does not possess an expectation of privacy may not consent to a search.<ref>
{{ibid1|RMJT}}{{atL|g6px4|48}}
</ref>

The relationship between the consenter and the suspect is not determinative.<ref>
{{ibid1|RMJT}}{{atL|g6px4|48}}<br>
</ref>

A parent can consent to a search of a child's portion of a residence as long as there were no restrictions on the parent's access to the zone of privacy.<ref>
{{ibid1|RMJT}}{{atL|g6px4|48}}<br>
</ref>

{{reflist|2}}

==Implied Licence==
The "occupier of a dwelling gives implied licence to any member of the public, including a police officer, on legitimate business to come on to the property” <ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Evans|1frf4|1996 CanLII 248 (CSC)|[1996] 1 RCS 8}}{{perSCC-H|Sopinka J}}{{atL|1frf4|13}} , citing {{CanLIIRP|Tricker|6jqj|1995 CanLII 1268 (ON CA)| OR (3d) 575}}{{perONCA|Galligan JA}}{{atp|579}}<br>
Voir également [[Doctrine du plain view#Officer Trespassing and Perimeter Searches|Doctrine du plain view]]<br>
</ref>
The licence "ends at the door of the dwelling."<ref>
{{ibid1|Tricker}}{{atL|6jqj|12}}</ref>
Privacy rights are waived unless there is a clear expression of intent rebutting this.<ref>Evans at 13</ref>

This consent extends only insofar as it permits a person to conveniently communicate with the occupant and the activities reasonably associated with this purpose.<ref>
{{supra1|Evans}}{{atL|1frf4|15}}</ref>
It does not extend to police approaching and knocking at the door for the purpose of collecting evidence against the occupant.<ref>
{{supra1|Evans}}{{atsL|1frf4|16|, 18, 20, 21}}</ref>

Entering on a person's driveway, where in plainview of the public will be included in the licence.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Lotozky|1nnqj|2006 CanLII 21041 (ON CA)|210 CCC (3d) 509}}{{perONCA|Rosenberg JA}} - police observed impaired driver exiting his car in the driveway</ref> 
But this was found impermissible for an attached garage.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Noerenberg|1w6kg|1997 CanLII 12354 (ON SC)|[1997] OJ No 4628 (Ont. Gen. Div.)}}{{perONSC|Lally J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Maciel|51nk|2003 CanLII 32396 (ON CA)| MVR (4th) 152}}{{TheCourtONCA}} - attached garage different from driveway<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Clements|1sxsz|2007 ABPC 220 (CanLII)|[2007] AJ No 1024 (ABPC)}}{{perABPC|Fraser J}}<br>
Voir également {{CanLIIRP|Belnavis|1fqzw|1997 CanLII 320 (CSC)|[1997] 3 RCS 341}}{{perSCC|Cory J}} - stating attached garage including in privacy of home
</ref>

A business open to the public will also provide a similar licence for police to enter.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Fitt|1mqf2|1995 CanLII 4342 (NS CA)|96 CCC (3d) 341}}{{perNSCA|Hallett JA}} aff'd [1996] 1 RCS 70, [http://canlii.ca/t/1frfb 1996 CanLII 251] (CSC){{perSCC|Lamer CJ}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Spindloe|1fjk0|2001 SKCA 58 (CanLII)|154 CCC (3d) 8}}{{perSKCA|Jackson JA}}<br>
</ref>

Consent to enter a home does not include a blanket right to search the whole house including the basement.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Smith|5scs|1998 ABCA 418 (CanLII)|128 CCC (3d) 62}}{{perABCA|Conrad JA}}</ref>

What constitutes implied licence "must be analyzed in [its] context."<ref>
{{supra1|Evans}}
</ref>

When "an invitee’s purpose changes from lawful to unlawful while on the premises, they become a trespasser.”<ref>
{{CanLIIR-N|Nobile| (2006), 75 WCB (2d) 581 (Ont. S.C.)}}{{at-|53}}
</ref>
{{reflist|2}}

==Authority to Consent and Third Party Consent==

A third party cannot consent or waive a suspect's rights under s. 8 of the Charter.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Reeves|hwk3l|2018 CSC 56 (CanLII)|367 CCC (3d) 129}}{{perSCC|Karakatsanis J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Cole|ft96b|2012 CSC 53 (CanLII)|[2012] 3 RCS 34}}{{perSCC-H|Fish J}}
</ref>

Third party consent by a wife or parent requires that the police also have diffident grounds to get a search warrant at the time.<ref>
{{CanLIIR-N|Barrett|, [1995] OJ No 920 (Ont. C.J.)}}
</ref>

; Mistaken Belief in Authority
For all searches, the police must have a subjective belief that they have consented to conduct the search and it must be an objectively reasonable belief in the circumstances. Where the police wrongly relied upon consent of a third party, the reasonableness of their belief will go to section 24(2) analysis.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|DiPalma|20k8k|2008 BCCA 342 (CanLII)|235 CCC (3d) 1}}{{perBCCA|Smith JA}}
</ref>

Issues of consent seizure will most often be dealt with by way of warrantless seizure under s. 489.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|RMJT|g6px4|2014 MBCA 36 (CanLII)|311 CCC (3d) 185}}{{perMBCA|Cameronn JA}}{{atL|g6px4|29}}
</ref>

{{reflist|2}}
===Joint Residency===
There is some authority that says an "authorized occupant" of a residence may give consent to a search.<ref> 
{{CanLIIRP|Duarte|1p77j|1987 CanLII 175 (ON CA)|38 CCC (3d) 1}}{{perONCA|Cory JA}}{{atp|11}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Currie|21f9l|2008 ABCA 374 (CanLII)|446 AR 41}}{{perABCA| Côté JA}} - resident gave consent to search house containing items of non-resident accused<br>
{{CanLIIRP|T(RMJ)|g6px4|2014 MBCA 36 (CanLII)|311 CCC (3rd) 185}}{{perMBCA|Cameron JA}}{{atsL|g6px4|41| to  52}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Clarke|hph6t|2017 BCCA 453 (CanLII)|357 CCC (3rd) 237}}{{perBCCA|MacKenzie JA}}{{AtsL|hph6t|55| to 56 and 62-63}}<Br>
{{CanLIIRP|Squires|1lc4t|2005 NLCA 51 (CanLII)|199 CCC (3rd) 509}}{{perNLCA|Mercer JA}}{{atL|1lc4t|34}}<br>
</ref> 
This will usually include the homeowner.
<ref> 
{{CanLIIRP|Smith|5scs|1998 ABCA 418 (CanLII)|126 CCC (3d) 62}}{{perABCA|Conrad JA}}{{atL|5scs|5}}</ref>

A parent of a suspect can usually consent to searches of the familial home where the suspect "does not expect restrictions on the access of others to those spaces."<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Reeves|hwk3l|2018 CSC 56 (CanLII)|367 CCC (3d) 129}}{{perSCC|Karakatsanis J}}{{atL|hwk3l|47}}<br>
</ref>

A landlord or neighbour does not constitute an "authorized occupant."<ref> 
{{CanLIIRP|Mercer|g1390|1992 CanLII 7729 (ON CA)|70 CCC 180 (ONCA)}}{{perONCA|Arbour JA}} - landlord<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Blinch|1dbvq|1993 CanLII 1433 (BC CA)| (1993) 83 CCC (3d) 158}}{{perBCCA|Rowles JA}}<br>
</ref>

Guests can have the authority to consent to a search of a home, however, the authorization can be revoked by the homeowner.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Thomas|1p8vs|1991 CanLII 2736 (NL CA)|67 CCC (3d) 81}}{{perNLCA|Goodridge CJ}} aff'd at SCC</ref>

The seizure of property "under mistaken authority is not necessarily fatal where authority otherwise exits."<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|RMJT|g6px4|2014 MBCA 36 (CanLII)|311 CCC (3d) 185}}{{perMBCA|Cameron JA}}{{atL|g6px4|64}}<br>
</ref>

; Consent of Accused's Parents
There will not necessarily be a violation of s. 8 where a parent consented to the search of the youth's bedroom.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|DMF|5s36|1999 ABCA 267 (CanLII)|139 CCC (3d) 144}}<br>
{{CanLIIR-N|Figuerora|, [2002] OJ No 3138 (Ont. SCJ)}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Scheck|5ktf|2002 BCSC 1046 (CanLII)|[2002] BCJ No 1671 (B.C.S.C.)}}<br>
</ref>
Parents who exercise control over a child's room or property may remove any expectation of privacy.<ref>
{{supra1|DMF}}</ref>

{{reflist|2}}

===Computers===
Police may not seize a device without a warrant that is jointly owned by multiple people unless they have the consent of ''all'' the owners.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Reeves|hwk3l|2018 CSC 56 (CanLII)|[2018] 3 RCS 531}}{{perSCC|Karakatsanis J}}
</ref>

<!--
Police may seize a hard drive where a computer repair technician has been given authority to examine the contents of the hard drive and finds illegal images.<ref>
{{CanLIIRxC|R c Piette|27brk|2009 QCCQ 14499 (CanLII)}}{{perQCCQ|Bonin J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Winchester|27qm8|2010 ONSC 652 (CanLII)|73 CR (6th) 371}}{{perONSC|Valin J}}<br>
</ref>
The computer repair technician is not an agent of the state in calling the police.<ref>
{{ibid1|Winchester}}
</ref>

Joint interest in a thing such as a computer can permit one of the joint owners to give consent to search it.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Pommer|1x6ms|2008 BCSC 423 (CanLII)|58 CR (6th) 319}}{{perBCSC|D Smith J}} - wife consenting to search of husband's property
</ref> 
However, in the case of an estranged husband, the ex-wife cannot consent to a search.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Libby|1x3vt|2008 NBQB 36 (CanLII)|76 WCB (2d) 541}}{{perNBQB| LaVigne J}}
</ref>
-->

; Employer Consent
An employer cannot provide consent to examine the contents of an employee's computer where they hold any reasonable expectation of privacy.<ref>
{{supra1|Cole}}{{atsL|ft96b|74| to 79}}<br>
</ref>

{{reflist|2}}

===Young Persons===
It is generally accepted that parents cannot waive the privacy interests of young persons.<ref>
{{CanLIIR-N|W. (J.P.)|, [1993] B.C.J. No. 2891 (Y.C.)}}{{fix}}
</ref>

However, simply having exclusive control of a room will not render it protected.<ref>
{{CanLIIR-N|Rai|, [1998] B.C.J. No. 2187}}{{fix}}
</ref>

{{reflist|2}}

==Mandatory Consent==
A court order, such as a probation order, can in certain circumstances require an offender to consent to random searches.<ref> 
{{CanLIIRP|Unruh|fs66q|2012 SKCA 72 (CanLII)|399 Sask R 66}}{{perSKCA|Herauf JA}} </ref> 
{{reflist|2}}

==Consent by Organizations Holding Personal Information==
Privacy of personal information within private companies is governed by the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). 

Section 7(3) permits the disclosure of personal information without the subject's knowledge or consent:

{{quotation1|
7...<br>
; Disclosure without knowledge or consent
(3) For the purpose of clause 4.3 of Schedule 1, and despite the note that accompanies that clause, an organization may disclose personal information without the knowledge or consent of the individual only if the disclosure is<br>
...<br>
:(c.1) made to a government institution or part of a government institution that has made a request for the information, identified its lawful authority to obtain the information and indicated that
::(i) it suspects that the information relates to national security, the defence of Canada or the conduct of international affairs,
::(ii) the disclosure is requested for the purpose of enforcing any law of Canada, a province or a foreign jurisdiction, carrying out an investigation relating to the enforcement of any such law or gathering intelligence for the purpose of enforcing any such law, or
::(iii) the disclosure is requested for the purpose of administering any law of Canada or a province;<br>
...<br>
:(d) made on the initiative of the organization to an investigative body, a government institution or a part of a government institution and the organization
::(i) has reasonable grounds to believe that the information relates to a breach of an agreement or a contravention of the laws of Canada, a province or a foreign jurisdiction that has been, is being or is about to be committed, or
::(ii) suspects that the information relates to national security, the defence of Canada or the conduct of international affairs;<br>
...<br>
:(h.2) made by an investigative body and the disclosure is reasonable for purposes related to investigating a breach of an agreement or a contravention of the laws of Canada or a province; ...
|[http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/sc-2000-c-5/latest/sc-2000-c-5.html PIPEDA]
}}

Under this section a peace officer may make a Law Enforcement Request (LER) requesting particular information of an accused person without their consent. A proper LER should identify the person requesting the information, what information is being requested, the purpose of the request for the information (presumably to obtain evidence to an offence). The organization is permitted but not required to provide the information requested.

{{reflist|2}}

Related: [[Obligation de la Couronne de divulguer|Disclosure]]

==Voir également==
* [[Renonciation aux droits garantis par la Charte]]