Citation: R v Scott, 2015 MBCA 80 Date: 20150831 Docket: AR15-30-08412 AR 15-30-08413 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Coram: Madam Justice Barbara M. Hamilton Mr. Justice Alan D. MacInnes Madam Justice Jennifer A. Pfuetzner BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ) K. D. Scott ) on his own behalfRespondent) ) J. A. Hyman ) for the Respondent- and - ) ) ) KURTIS DONALD SCOTT ) Appeal heard and ) Decision pronounced:(Accused) Appellant) August 31, 2015 HAMILTON JA (for the Court): [1] The accused is charged with cocaine trafficking and several criminal organization-related offences.

His jury trial isset for this fall. [2] In advance of the trial, the accused made motions under the Charter before the trial judge to exclude wiretapevidence and evidence obtained from the search of a vehicle owned and operated by a third party. After a voir dire, the trial judge ruledthe evidence admissible. [3] The accused filed a notice of appeal of the trial judge’s interlocutory evidentiary rulings. The Crown applied to havethe accused’s notice of appeal struck on the ground that this Court does not have the jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

We allowed theCrown’s application and granted the order to strike the accused’s notice of appeal filed June 17, 2015, for the following reasons. [4] The right to appeal is created by statute. In this case, the relevant statute is the Criminal Code. The Criminal Codeonly provides for appeals of final orders, the most notable of which are convictions, acquittals and sentences. See sections 674-676. Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms rulings within a prosecution are interlocutory in nature and, therefore, are not final orders. See R v Meltzer, (SCC), [1989] 1 SCR 1764.

Also see R v Druken, (SCC), [1998] 1 SCR 978; R vTeerhuis-Moar (S), 2008 MBCA 85, 228 ManR (2d) 248; and R v Scott (KD), 2015 MBCA 43. Therefore, this Court has no jurisdictionto hear the appeal filed by the accused. J.A.

J.A. J.A.