Matches in DBpedia 2014 for { <http://dbpedia.org/resource/R._v._Sinclair> ?p ?o. }
Showing items 1 to 31 of
31
with 100 items per page.
- R._v._Sinclair abstract "R. v. Sinclair 2010 SCC 35 is a leading case from the Supreme Court of Canada on a detainee's right to counsel under section 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Specifically, the case addresses two issues regarding the police's implementation duty under the right to counsel: 1) does a detainee have the right to have a lawyer present during police questioning, and 2) does a detainee have the right to make multiple phone calls to their lawyer. A majority of the Court answered the first question in the negative, and answered the second question in the negative, subject to a change of circumstances. The parties to the case were the appellant, Sinclair, the respondent, the Attorney General of British Columbia, and the following interveners: the Attorney General of Ontario, the Director of Public Prosecutions of Canada, the Criminal Lawyers' Association of Ontario, the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. The case was part of a trilogy of cases released by the Supreme Court, along with R. v. Willier and R. v. McCrimmon.".
- R._v._Sinclair wikiPageExternalLink fac-mem-eng.aspx?cas=32537.
- R._v._Sinclair wikiPageID "32415623".
- R._v._Sinclair wikiPageRevisionID "560965696".
- R._v._Sinclair caseName "R. v. Sinclair".
- R._v._Sinclair citations "[2010] 2 S.C.R. 310".
- R._v._Sinclair decidedDate "2010-10-08".
- R._v._Sinclair dissent "Binnie J.".
- R._v._Sinclair dissent "LeBel and Fish JJ.".
- R._v._Sinclair docket "32537".
- R._v._Sinclair fullCaseName "Trent Terrence Sinclair v. Her Majesty the Queen".
- R._v._Sinclair hasPhotoCollection R._v._Sinclair.
- R._v._Sinclair heardDate "2009-05-12".
- R._v._Sinclair history "Judgment for the Crown in the British Columbia Court of Appeal.".
- R._v._Sinclair joindissent "Abella J.".
- R._v._Sinclair joinmajority "Deschampes, Rothstein, and Cromwell JJ.".
- R._v._Sinclair majority "McLachlin C.J. and Charron J.".
- R._v._Sinclair ratio "A detainee does not generally have the right to have additional phone calls with counsel, unless there has been a change of circumstances.".
- R._v._Sinclair ratio "A detainee does not have the right to have counsel present during a police interrogation.".
- R._v._Sinclair ruling "appeal dismissed".
- R._v._Sinclair scc "2009".
- R._v._Sinclair subject Category:2010_in_Canadian_case_law.
- R._v._Sinclair subject Category:Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms_case_law.
- R._v._Sinclair subject Category:Supreme_Court_of_Canada_cases.
- R._v._Sinclair comment "R. v. Sinclair 2010 SCC 35 is a leading case from the Supreme Court of Canada on a detainee's right to counsel under section 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Specifically, the case addresses two issues regarding the police's implementation duty under the right to counsel: 1) does a detainee have the right to have a lawyer present during police questioning, and 2) does a detainee have the right to make multiple phone calls to their lawyer.".
- R._v._Sinclair label "R. v. Sinclair".
- R._v._Sinclair sameAs m.0gyry6_.
- R._v._Sinclair sameAs Q7274304.
- R._v._Sinclair sameAs Q7274304.
- R._v._Sinclair wasDerivedFrom R._v._Sinclair?oldid=560965696.
- R._v._Sinclair isPrimaryTopicOf R._v._Sinclair.