HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Applicant - v. -, 2003 ABCA 108

R. v. Vandersteen, 2003 ABCA 108 Date: 2003 04 03 Docket: 0203-0366-A3 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF ALBERTA ____________________________________________________ TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C ÔTÉ DELIVERED APRIL 2, 2003 ____________________________________________________ BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Applicant - and - JOEL VANDERSTEEN Respondent APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.W. GALLANT DATED THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, A.D. 2002 COUNSEL :

D.R. Valgardson For the Applicant No one appeared for the Respondent P.G. Northcott As a Friend of the Court ____________________________________________________ TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C ÔTÉ DELIVERED APRIL 2, 2003 ____________________________________________________ C Ô T É J.A. : [ 1 ] On appeal from Provincial Court, the Court of Queen’s Bench entered an acquittal. The Crown seeks leave to appeal further to the Court of Appeal. That leave must be on a point of law alone, and it is customary to state the point of law. [ 2 ] I have listened to Ms.

Valgardson for the Crown and read her material. I have also listened to Mr. Northcott, who was trial counsel, but has not been able to obtain instructions from his former client, nor indeed to contact him. He appeared as a Friend of the Court and gave some helpful submissions. [ 3 ] I am satisfied that initially there was service on the respondent accused of this Notice of Motion, even though later it has proved impossible for people to contact him, or tell him of the adjourned date of the motion. And he has not contacted his former counsel, Mr.

Northcott, who has also not been able to reach him. [ 4 ] I believe that the matter should go ahead. The question of law proposed by the Crown, in my view, is not academic. The question of law is what legal restrictions under the Charter and otherwise, if any, apply to a school official searching a pupil of that school outside the property limits of the school and its grounds. The Crown’s appeal will be limited to that question of law.

I say nothing about what arguments the respondent accused may raise before the Court of Appeal to try to uphold the acquittal entered by the Court of Queen’s Bench. [ 5 ] All this is also without prejudice to any motion which the respondent may wish to bring for the appointment of counsel by the court, or to any motion which Mr. Northcott may bring to be appointed as a Friend of the Court to argue or intervene in the hearing of the appeal, or in the filing of written argument. [ 6 ] We will have my brief reasons transcribed so you can have the exact question in front of you.

APPLICATION HEARD on April 2, 2003 TRANSCRIBED at EDMONTON , Alberta this 3rd day of April , 2003

___________________________ C ÔTÉ J.A.