R v Malmo-Levine; R v Caine
R v Malmo-Levine; R v Caine [2003] 3 S.C.R. 571, 2003 SCC 74, is a Supreme Court of Canada decision that Parliament had the authority to criminalize the possession and trafficking of marijuana, and that power did not infringe on the section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
| R v Malmo-Levine; R v Caine | |
|---|---|
| Hearing: May 6, 2003 Judgment: December 23, 2003 | |
| Full case name | David Malmo‑Levine v Her Majesty The Queen; Victor Eugene Caine v Her Majesty The Queen |
| Citations | [2003] 3 S.C.R. 571, 2003 SCC 74 |
| Prior history | R. v. Malmo-Levine, [1998] B.C.J. No. 1025 (QL) (S.C.); R. v. Caine, [1998] B.C.J. No. 885 (QL)(Prov. Ct.); R. v. Malmo-Levine et al., 2000 BCCA 335 |
| Ruling | Appeal dismissed. |
| Holding | |
| Parliament is authorized to criminalize possession of marijuana. Criminalization of marijuana does not infringe on Section 7 rights in the Charter. The harm principle is not a fundamental principle of natural justice. | |
| Court membership | |
| Chief Justice: Beverley McLachlin Puisne Justices: Charles Gonthier, Frank Iacobucci, John C. Major, Michel Bastarache, Ian Binnie, Louise Arbour, Louis LeBel, Marie Deschamps | |
| Reasons given | |
| Majority | Gonthier and Binnie JJ., joined by McLachlin C.J. and Iacobucci, Major and Bastarache JJ. |
| Dissent | Arbour J. (in Caine) |
| Dissent | LeBel J. (in Caine) |
| Dissent | Deschamps J. (in Caine) |
The Court found the harm principle is not a fundamental aspect of natural justice in Canada relevant to section 7 of the Charter.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.