Situating Exclusion of Evidence Analysis in its Socio-Legal Place: A Tale of Judicial Populism.

In the 2009 case of R. v. Grant, the Supreme Court of Canada reformulated the exclusion of evidence framework in the context of Charter breaches. The case was something of a revolution for those who study evidence law and the Charter. Thus far, the case has been the subject of much debate and even e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Crime, Law & Social Change Vol. 61; no. 5; pp. 541 - 562
Autores principales: Jochelson, Richard, Kramar, Kirsten
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Jun2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=95964427&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 95964427
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        09254994
        CRG
      jtl: Crime, Law & Social Change
      issn: 09254994
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jun2014
      vid: 61
      iid: 5
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        95964427
        10.1007/s10611-014-9515-9
      ppf: 541
      ppct: 21
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 310KB
      tig:
        atl: Situating Exclusion of Evidence Analysis in its Socio-Legal Place: A Tale of Judicial Populism.
      aug:
        au:
          Jochelson, Richard
          Kramar, Kirsten
        affil: Sociology and Criminal Justice, University of Winnipeg, 515 Portage Avenue R3B2E9 Winnipeg Canada
      su:
        Canada
        Police power
        Populism
        Legal evidence
        Courts
        Police regulations
      sug:
        subj:
          Police power
          Populism
          Legal evidence
          Courts
          Canada
          Courts
          Police regulations
      keyword:
        Canadian judiciary
        Governance by the court
        Judicial populism
        Police powers
        Canadian judiciary
        Governance by the court
        Judicial populism
        Police powers
      ab: In the 2009 case of R. v. Grant, the Supreme Court of Canada reformulated the exclusion of evidence framework in the context of Charter breaches. The case was something of a revolution for those who study evidence law and the Charter. Thus far, the case has been the subject of much debate and even empirical study. Few academic papers have explored the philosophical predilections of the Court in the decision. In this paper, the authors briefly review the history of the exclusion of evidence test, explain the new framework and discuss the academic and legal responses to the case. The authors place the reasoning of the Court in a broader socio-legal context arguing that the test articulated by the Court is informed by a type of populism that combined with recent Charter cases in the police powers context allows for flexible potentials, ones that could, on occasion, encroach on due process protections. The authors call for scholars and activists to keep a close eye on the emerging jurisprudence in this critical area of Charter adjudication.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N