FavoriteLoadingSave to briefcase | Rating: | By (2012)

  • PrintEmail Link
  • Viewed 8,711 times | Saved to 278 briefcases
R v. Mann , [2004] 3 S.C.R. 59


Police officers got a dispatch about B&E. Went to seen saw man that fit description nearby. Asked him questions/he agreed to pat down search/found weed and pills/charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking


1. Is there a common police power to detain an individual person for the purpose of investigation?

2. Is a warrantless search incident to investigative detention in violation of s.8?


1. A officer must have reasonable and probable grounds to detain someone (articulable cause).

2. A police officer may engage in a pat down search if he has reasonable grounds to believe that his or someone else’s safety is at risk. It must be conducted in a reasonable manner.


Waterfield Test – Used in Deadman
1. Does it fall within scope of police?
**a. Police Conduct.
**b. Whether an invasion of individual rights is necessary in order to perform their duty.
2. If so, Was use of power unjustified? (Was it a justified use of police power associated with the duty?).
**a. If the detaining officer had some articulable cause (R v. Simpson (1993)) – Must have articulable cause.
***i. Reasonable grounds to suspect was equivalent to articulable cause standard - “reasonable grounds to detain” .
***ii. Must be some nexus between this person and the offence – particularize suspicion.
***iii. Was the detention reasonable necessary in the detention? (Must have this to meet the 2nd prong of the test).
****1. Extent the interference with individual liberty is necessary to perform the officers duty
****2. The liberty interfered with
****3. Nature and extent of the interference

There is a distinction between search incidental to arrest and search incidental to an investigative detention.
A search as part of an investigative detention is appropriate if: (limit on search) -Collin:
**1. The officer has reasonable grounds to believe that his safety or that of others is at risk.
**2. The search must be reasonably necessary in the totality of the circumstances.
**3. The search must be confined in scope to the location of weapons or other threats to safety


The officer had reasonable grounds to detain Mann.

The seizure of the weed was unlawful.


When trying to determine if a police officer acted within their common law power use the Waterfield Test

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to participate.

This document is a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and must not be relied upon as legal advice. This document may not have been written or reviewed by a legal practitioner. For more information, please see the website Terms of Service.