# data[].attributes.body
This webpage explains the various requirements under section 10 of the Canadian Charter of rights and freedoms. Such explanations include an outline of general provisions and purpose of the section. The webpage includes definitions such as that of the meaning of detention. It goes on to explain s10(a) right to be informed promptly of the reason for arrest or detention, followed by s10(b) right to counsel and so on. The page is relevant to the topic as it is an overview of the most relevant section of the Charter which outlines rights upon arrest or detention.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Provision

10. Everyone has the right on arrest or detention

1. to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor;

2. to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and

3. to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.

Purpose

Section 10 provides for certain rights that are triggered as soon as an individual is "detained" or "arrested" within the meaning of the section.

Analysis

1. Detention - Generally

"Detention" in section 10 has the same meaning as in section 9 of the Charter (R. v. Hufsky, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 621 at paragraph 12).

"Detention" under section 10 is directed towards a restraint of liberty other than arrest in which a person may reasonably require the assistance of counsel. Detention requires some form of physical or psychological restraint, compulsion or coercion ( R. v. Grant, [2009] 2 S.C.R. 353 at paragraph 44). Section 10 is directed at a multiplicity of restraints of liberty of varying duration (R. v. Therens, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 613 at paragraph 50).

A psychological detention occurs where the subject is legally required to comply with a direction or where, in the absence of such a direction, state conduct would lead a reasonable person to conclude that he or she had no choice but to comply ( Therens, supra at paragraph 57; Grant, supra at paragraphs 30, 44). In cases where there is no physical restraint or legal obligation, it may not be clear whether a person has been detained. To determine whether the reasonable person in the individual's circumstances would conclude that he or she had been deprived by the state of the liberty of choice, the court may consider:

1. the circumstances giving rise to the encounter as they would reasonably be perceived by the individual: whether police were providing general assistance, maintaining general order, making general inquiries or singling out the individual for focused investigation;

2. the nature of the police conduct, including the language used; the use of physical contact; the place where the interaction occurred; the presence of others; and the duration of the encounter; and

3. the characteristics or circumstances of the individual where relevant, including age, physical stature, minority status, and/or level of sophistication (Grant, supra at paragraph 44).

The above analysis involves an objective determination, made in light of the circumstances of the encounter as a whole; the perspective of the reasonable person must be informed by the fact that a bystander is under no legal obligation to comply with a police request for information or assistance. The onus is on the applicant to show that he or she was deprived of his or her liberty of choice ( R. v. Suberu, [2009] 2 S.C.R. 460 at paragraphs 22, 28).

The constitutional rights in section 10 (and section 9) are not engaged by delays that invoke no significant physical or psychological restraint:

[T]he police cannot be said to "detain", within the meaning of ss. 9 and 10 of the Charter, every suspect they stop for purposes of identification, or even interview. The person who is stopped will in all cases be "detained" in the sense of "delayed", or "kept waiting". But the constitutional rights recognized by ss. 9 and 10 of the Charter are not engaged by delays that involve no significant physical or psychological restraint ( Suberu, supra at paragraph 23, citing R. v. Mann, [2004] 3 R.C.S. 59, at paragraph 19).

Therefore, an investigative detention does not necessarily arise the moment police engage an individual for investigative purposes or ask preliminary questions ( Suberu, supra at paragraphs 23, 28).

Changes in one's conditions of imprisonment may be sufficiently severe so as to be considered a second "detention," the legality of which is reviewable by habeas corpus (see Cardinal et al. v. Director of Kent Institution, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 643 at pargraph 13; see also May v. Ferndale Institution, [2005] 3 S.C.R. 809; Mission Institution v. Khela, [2014] 1 S.C.R. 502). The concept of an additional detention engaging section 10 rights may also apply in other circumstances (see e.g., R. v. Bourdon, 2010 ONSC 2089, concerning the apprehension of an offender after suspension of a long-term supervision order).

2. Detention - Criminal context

In many cases, it will be undisputed that a detention has occurred. Generally, there is a detention when a police officer or other state agent assumes control over the movement of a person by a demand or direction which may have significant legal consequence and which prevents or impedes access to counsel ( R. v. Thomsen, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 640 at paragraphs 12-13).

Where it is unclear whether a police request amounts to a detention, a number of factors must be assessed:

1. the precise language used by the police officer in requesting the person to come to the police station, and whether the person was given a choice or expressed a preference that the interview be conducted at the police station;

2. whether the person was escorted to the police station by a police officer or went himself or herself in response to a police request;

3. whether the person left at the conclusion of the interview or was arrested;

4. the stage of the investigation;

5. whether the police had reasonable and probable grounds to believe that the person had committed a crime;

6. the nature of the questions; whether the questions were of a general nature; and

7. the subjective belief by the person that he or she was detained; personal circumstances relating to the person (R. v. Moran (1987), 36 C.C.C. (3d) 225 (Ont. C.A.), leave to appeal to S.C.C. refused, [1988] 1 S.C.R. xi (note)).

These factors from the Moran decision continue to be cited in appellate and lower court cases decided after the Supreme Court's decision in Grant, supra (see, e.g., R. v. Seagull, 2015 BCCA 164 and R. v. Lafrance, 2017 ABQB 446). The Moran factors have yet to be explicitly adopted in Supreme Court jurisprudence, but were referred to with apparent approval in the partially concurring minority reasons in Grant, at paragraph 168, per Binnie J. Any current invocation of the factors should be considered as subject to the general considerations outlined by the majority in Grant (see R. v. Nicholas, 2017 ONCA 646).

Where it is clear that criminal liability may result from a person's refusal to accompany the police, the necessary element of compulsion or coercion required for a finding of detention is present. The detention is not and cannot be dependent upon "compliance" by the recipient of the demand ( R. v. Schmautz, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 398 at paragraphs 17-19).

A person is not detained when voluntarily submitting to the questioning of police officers if that questioning is not hostile or coercive in nature and the person does not believe his or her freedom to be restrained, or the circumstances would not lead him or her reasonably to believe his or her freedom to be restrained ( R. v. Esposito (1985), 24 C.C.C. (3d) 88 (Ont. C.A.), leave to appeal to S.C.C. refused, [1986] 1 S.C.R. viii). The fact that an individual is advised that he or she is free to leave at any time is relevant but not determinative. If the surrounding circumstances give rise to a reasonable belief that there was no choice but to submit to the police demand, a detention has occurred ( R. v. Johns, [1998] O.J. No. 445, (1998), 123 C.C.C. (3d) 190 (Ont. C.A.) at paragraph 28). The principle in this context, from earlier jurisprudence, must be considered in light of the further elaboration of general principles on detention in cases such as Mann and Grant, supra.

A detention may occur simply by the police officer touching an individual and ordering him to move ( R. v. Feeney, [1997] 2 S.C.R. 13 at paragraph 56).

A student summoned by the principal who feels compelled to be there is not detained for the purposes of paragraph 10(b), although this might be the case where the principal is acting as an agent of the police ( R. v. M.(M.R.), [1998] 3 S.C.R. 393 at paragraphs 65-68). The same appears to be true where the person detaining the individual is a private store detective ( R. v. Shafie (1989), 47 C.C.C. (3d) 27 (Ont. C.A.) at 33-34).

When police investigations are expanded and directed at other offences during a questioning session, the police have a duty to inform the person of rights under section 10 again. As such, an individual is in effect "re-detained" ( R. v. Borden, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 145 at paragraphs 43-45; R. v. Black, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 138 at 152-153).

The demand for a roadside breath test under subsection 234.1(1) (now subsection 254(2)) of the Criminal Code falls within the criteria for detention. The difference in duration of the restraint of liberty resulting from a subsection 234.1(1) demand (screening) and that resulting from a subsection 235(1) (now subsection 254(3) of the Criminal Code) demand (breathalyzer) is not such as to prevent the former from constituting a detention within the meaning of section 10 ( Thomsen, supra at paragraph 13; Schmautz, supra at paragraphs 16-17).

3. Detention - Border context

Since there is no right for non-citizens to enter or remain in Canada, and considering that all persons seeking entry to Canada must pass through immigration screening, a routine secondary examination is equivalent to the first level customs inspection found to be constitutional in R. v. Simmons, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 495. The restriction on the person's freedom has not gone beyond what is required for the processing of the application for entry and is not, therefore, a detention within the meaning of paragraph 10(b) ( Dehghani v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 1053 at paragraphs 34-42). Normal routine questioning, even where there is a suspicion that the individual is committing an illegal act, does not amount to a detention in the customs context ( R. v. Hardy, [1994] B.C.W.L.D. 1872 (S.C.) at paragraphs 64-73).

However, when a person is taken out of the normal course of routine questioning by officials, and required to submit to a strip search, that person is detained within the meaning of section 10 ( Simmons, supra at paragraphs 35-36; R. v. Jacoy, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 548 at paragraph 14).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
10. Everyone has the right on arrest or detention to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor; to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a video outlining ones rights upon arrest or detention. It includes an example of cases for which precedences were set regarding ones rights in the mentioned situations. It is a short summary video, which directly relates to the topic of the Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms regarding ones rights upon arrest or detention.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: Legal Rights; Arrest or Detention

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Legal Rights Arrest or detention 10. Everyone has the right on arrest or detention (a) to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor; (b) to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and (c) to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.

# data[].attributes.body
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a section of the 1982 constitution relevant to the topic of rights upon arrest or detention. The Charter was preceded by the Canadian Bill of rights passed in 1960.  The Charter sought to update the federal statutory nature of the Bill of rights. The Charter is entrenched in the constitution and as such, it is applicable to provincial laws and may not be amended through ordinary legislative processes

# data[].attributes.body
This webpage article is a brief outline of what to do when arrested or detained by police and how not to for-fit your rights. As such it is relevant to the topic. It briefly outlines your rights, describes how to tell if you are being arrested or detained. It also summarizes the rights of the police officers and how they are allowed to treat you. Through the number of pages this site offers advice and how to act based on your rights as-well as what questions you should ask.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Your rights

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects your right to be told why you're being detained or arrested.

What to do if you're being detained

If you're unsure if you're being detained, you can tell the police that you don't wish to talk to them. Ask, "Am I free to leave?" If the police say you can go, simply walk away.

If the police say you are not free to go, you're being detained and they must tell you why.

The police are legally allowed to detain you if they have reasonable grounds to suspect you've been involved in a crime. Having reasonable grounds is more than having a hunch based on the facts. The officer must believe that any reasonable person in the officer's position would think there are reasons to suspect you were involved in a crime.

If you have been detained but you think the police don't have reasonable grounds to suspect you've been involved in a crime or they have not clearly explained why you're being detained you should not try to leave. If you have these concerns you should discuss them with a lawyer later on.

What to do if you're being arrested

If you're unsure if you're being arrested, ask. Say politely, "Am I under arrest?" If the police say that you are, ask them why.

The police can arrest you if they:

see you doing a crime and it is in the public interest to arrest you

have reasonable grounds to believe you committed, or are about to commit, an indictable offence which is a more serious crime

have a warrant for your arrest

have reasonable grounds to believe a warrant exists for your arrest

If the police are going to arrest you without a warrant for a summary offence they must believe it's in the public's best interest to:

find out who you are

stop you from damaging or hiding evidence

stop a crime

If the police don't have a warrant, they are only allowed to arrest you for a minor crime if they:

see you committing the offence, and

they have reasonable grounds to believe it's in the public's best interest to arrest you.

You might be charged without being arrested if you tell the truth about who you are and the police believe:

you will not destroy evidence

you will not repeat the offence

you will go to court as required

If the crime is more serious, you will be arrested.

If you've been detained or arrested, you don't have to answer any questions the police ask you. You have the right to remain silent.

Don't resist if the police try to arrest you. Resisting arrest will not stop the police from arresting you. And you risk being charged with more offences, such as obstructing the police, assaulting a peace officer or assault with intent to resist arrest.

Resisting unlawful arrest

The Criminal Code gives you the right to resist an unlawful arrest. You are allowed to take reasonable actions to defend yourself from an unlawful threat or use of force coming from the police, but this will not stop the police from arresting you.

If you think your detention or arrest was unlawful, you canseek a remedy for a breach of those rights later with the help of a lawyer.

A court will decide whether your arrest was lawful. If the court finds that the arrest was unlawful, you had a right to resist.

But if the court finds that the arrest was lawful, you could be charged with obstructing the police. You can also be charged with assaulting a peace officer or assault with intent to resist arrest.

What to say

If you've been detained or arrested, ask to talk to a lawyer right away.

Just say, "I want to talk to a lawyer." The police should stop questioning you as soon as you ask for a lawyer. You don't have to say anything else. If the police keep asking questions, don't say anything. Ask again to talk to a lawyer.

If you do not speak or understand English, tell the police so that they can take steps to make sure that legal advice is given through an interpreter or a lawyer who speaks your language.

Your rights

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects your right to talk to a lawyer without delay when you're detained or arrested. In most circumstances the police must tell you that you have this right. If you ask, the police must allow you to contact a lawyer.

You must be allowed to talk to the lawyer in private. The exception is if you have been pulled over while driving for a Highway Traffic Act reason or for a roadside breath test.

If you still do not understand your rights after talking to a lawyer you should clearly tell the police. The police may have a duty to give you the opportunity to talk to another lawyer.

You are allowed to call someone who is not a lawyer if the purpose of the phone call is to get help to find a lawyer.

The rights related to talking to a lawyer are called the right to counsel. Always talk to a lawyer before you talk to the police.

Services while in custody

If you need to talk to a lawyer while you're in custody, the police must tell you about the Brydges duty counsel service. This is a service provided by Legal Aid Ontario. It gives free legal advice to anyone in Ontario who is detained or arrested. It is available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The service is available in English, French, and any other language through an interpreter.

Tell the police officer that you want to talk to duty counsel if you don't have your own criminal lawyer. The officer should call the hotline for you and let you speak with duty counsel in private. If duty counsel is not available, the officer can leave a message and duty counsel should call you back within 30 minutes.

What the police can do

The police must stop questioning you until you have talked to a lawyer in private.

The police must allow you to call the lawyer you want to speak to more than once if there is no answer on the first try. If after several tries you still can't reach the lawyer and they have not called you back, the police must let you talk to a different lawyer.

If you do not speak or understand English, tell the police so that they can take steps to make sure that legal advice is given through an interpreter or a lawyer who speaks your language.

What to say

The police can keep asking questions and trying to get a statement from you even after you say that you want to remain silent. If the police are questioning you and you don't want to answer, tell them. Politely say, "I do not wish to give a statement or answer any questions." Repeat this as often as necessary. By saying this, you make it clear that you have chosen to use your right to remain silent.

Your rights

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects your right to remain silent. In most situations, you don't have to answer any questions the police ask you. Anything you say to the police may be used as evidence if you're charged with an offence.

If you're being detained or arrested, the police may caution you before asking for a statement, but they don't have to tell you about your right to remain silent.

It's usually in your best interest to remain silent. It's always in your best interest to wait until you've talked to a lawyer before you decide whether to answer questions from the police.

If you lie to the police, you can be charged with obstructing justice.

Exception for a motor vehicle accident

If you're in a motor vehicle accident you may be required by law to give a statement to the police. This statement is called an accident report. You are required by law to give police the information necessary to complete the report. You can ask the officer if the information is being requested for an accident report or for a criminal investigation. If it is for a criminal investigation, you do not have to say anything.

Your accident report cannot be used against you as self-incriminating evidence of an offence related to the accident, but making an untrue statement is an offence under the Highway Traffic Act. Also, if you lie to the police, you can be charged with obstructing justice.

The police are legally allowed to search you under certain conditions when you're being detained or arrested. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects you from unreasonable search and seizure. This means the police must conduct their search in a reasonable manner. They aren't allowed to destroy your property for no reason. If the police do their search in a way that is not reasonable, a court may later decide that the evidence they found can't be used against you.

What the police are allowed to do

When you're being detained, the police can pat you with their hands to search for weapons. This is to make sure you're not a threat to the police or public safety. They aren't allowed to empty your pockets, purse, knapsack, or other type of bag. They are only allowed to frisk you to find and take away weapons.

When you're being arrested, the police can search you and your immediate surroundings, which include:

you

your clothing

anything you're carrying, including your knapsack or purse

your cell phone, if you do not have a password. If you have a password you do not have to give it to the police

your car if that's where you're arrested

When you're being arrested, the police can conduct a more thorough search. They can search you to:

find evidence related to the offence you're being arrested for

prevent you from destroying evidence

protect the police or public

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What are my rights if I'm detained or arrested?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When you're being detained or arrested by the police, you have rights. These rights are protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Your rights You have the right to: be told why you're being detained or arrested be searched in a reasonable manner remain silent talk to a lawyer, in most circumstances Don't resist if the police try to arrest you.

# data[].attributes.body
This video is relative to the rights of individuals, police, and bystanders regarding a crime. It outlines the rights of all who are involved in the situation. The video is based on Irish law but relates closely to the laws within Canada. The video explains Habeas Corpus which is the term used to denote ones Constitutional Charter rights upon arrest or detention, the topic being discussed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Arrest , detention & Habeas Corpus, explained - Ireland Criminal Law

# data[].attributes.body
Section 11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is also relevant to the topic at hand. The section states rules of what one is entitled to once arrested. A trial and or trial by jury must be allowed within a reasonable time period. One must not be presumed guilty of an offence without it being proven without reasonable doubt. One must be granted bail unless it can be proved that doing so would be a harm to the community.

# data[].attributes.body
The constitution act, 1982, is a non exhaustive amalgamation of codified acts and un-codified conventions. It is the highest form of law within the country. It can only be amended through the use of a special amending formula, making it hard to amend and not possible to change through the use of standard legislative processes. The Charter of rights and freedoms is contained within the constitution. The constitution is an update from the British North America act, 1867.
It is because of the Constitution that one has rights upon being arrested or detained, making it relevant to the topic.

# data[].attributes.body
This video explains the rights of a young person upon arrest or detention. Not only adults have rights upon detention or arrest, under the youth criminal justice act, young offenders are also allowed to exercise their rights. This video is relative to the topic of the Constitution and The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and your rights upon arrest or detention.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Youth Criminal Justice: Arrest, Detention, and Bail

# data[].attributes.body
This webpage article helps to identify what circumstances will trigger the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It provides link to several relevant pages and cases. The information and links contained on the page are all relevant to the Constitution, the Charter, or ones rights upon arrest or detention.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Section 10 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Wikipedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Section 10 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms specifies rights upon arrest or detention, including the rights to consult a lawyer and the right to habeas corpus . As a part of a broader range of legal rights guaranteed by the Charter, section 10 rights may be limited by the Oakes test and/or the notwithstanding clause.

# data[].attributes.headline
📝Word document, Canadian law assignment number 2 questions. 

# data[].attributes.subject
📝Word document, Canadian law assignment number 2 questions. 

# data[].attributes.body
Canadian Law - An Introduction 1308
Canii.org
Youtube.com
Canada.ca
Wikipedia.org
Justice.gc.ca
Stepstojustice.ca