R v Shannon

R. v. Shannon

[1992] O.J. No. 2652
Ontario Court of Appeal — Houlden, Arbour and Weiler JJ.A. | December 11, 1992

Background

On November 18, 1990, Maureen Shannon was driving when her vehicle passed a marked police cruiser operated by P.C. Fleisham. As her car passed, the VG2 interceptor in the police cruiser was activated. The officer turned around, determined it was Shannon's vehicle that had triggered the device, stopped her, and confiscated a UNIDEN radar detector from her car.

Shannon was charged under section 61(2) of the Highway Traffic Act (now section 79(2)) for driving with a radar warning device. Instead of simply fighting the charge, she brought an application to prohibit the trial from proceeding until she got proper disclosure from the Crown — specifically, she wanted the operator's handbook or service manual for the VG2 interceptor device that detected her radar detector.

Issues

1. Was the Crown required to disclose the technical manual for the VG2 interceptor before trial?
2. Under what circumstances would such technical disclosure be necessary?

The Disclosure Fight

The motions court judge ordered the Crown to disclose the VG2 manual before trial could proceed. Shannon's defence argued they needed this technical information to properly defend the case. The manufacturer of the VG2 interceptor — sometimes called the 'detector's detector' — would not voluntarily supply that information to the defence since they only sell to law enforcement agencies.

The Court of Appeal disagreed with the pre-trial disclosure order. The court identified only two situations where the VG2 technical information would be relevant: First, if the Crown relied on the VG2 device to prove that the seized device was actually a radar detector. In that case, the defence would be entitled to challenge the VG2's capacity, functioning, and accuracy. Second, if the defence brought a motion to exclude evidence arguing the seizure was made without reasonable grounds.

However, Crown counsel assured the court they would not be using the VG2 device to prove any element of the offence — they would attempt to prove the seized device was a radar detector through other means. The court noted that no motion to exclude evidence had been brought, and any such motion would be premature at this stage.

Key Takeaway

You can't force disclosure of evidence the Crown doesn't plan to use against you.

The court ruled that technical disclosure should be left for the trial judge to decide based on how the Crown actually presents its case and what motions the defence actually brings. Speculative disclosure requests made before trial won't succeed.