Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Andre Lecuyer (respondent) (16/71) Indexed As: R. v. Lecuyer 2017 NLCA 72 2 C.A.N.L.R. 399 Court of Appeal of Newfoundland and Labrador Harrington, Hoegg and O’Brien JJ.A. December 13, 2017

Summary: The Crown appealed a ruling of the Supreme Court Trial Division, which excluded evidence against Mr. Lecuyer under section 24(2) of the Charter after finding that his sections 8 and 9 Charter rights had been violated. Held: Appeal allowed, new trial ordered. Hoegg J.A. (Harrington and O’Brien JJ.A. concurring): Mr. Lecuyer conceded that the appeal should be allowed. The panel agreed to allow the appeal on the basis that the trial judge’s rulings on the Charter breaches are without foundation in fact and law. A new trial was ordered. Counsel: Lisa Stead, for the appellant; Derek Hogan, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on December 8, 2017 before Harrington, Hoegg and O’Brien JJ.A. and the decision was rendered orally on that date. The following Memorandum of Disposition was filed on December 13, 2017 by Hoegg J.A. for the Court. ______________________________________________________________ Hoegg J.A.: [ 1 ] Andrew Lecuyer was charged with unlawful confinement, armed robbery, having his face masked with intent to commit an indictable offence and break and entry.

After he was committed to stand trial, he filed a pre-trial application alleging breaches of his Charter rights and requesting evidence be consequentially excluded. The trial Judge allowed the application, finding that Mr. Lecuyer’s

section 8 and 9 Charter rights had been breached and excluding evidence under section 24(2). [ 2 ] The Crown appealed on the basis that there was insufficient evidence upon which the trial judge could find the breaches and also that he failed to analyze and decide the issues according to law. Mr. Lecuyer agreed that the appeal should be allowed. [ 3 ] After considering the record and the written and oral submissions of Crown and defence counsel, the panel agreed to allow the appeal on the basis that the trial judge’s rulings on the Charter breaches are without foundation in fact and law. Accordingly, the trial judge’s rulings respecting breaches of Mr. Lecuyer’s

section 8 and 9 Charter rights and his consequential ruling to exclude evidence under section 24(2) are vacated and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court Trial Division for a new trial. Appeal allowed, new trial ordered .