When police investigate a suspected crime, how far can they go before violating your Charter rights? The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal’s decision in R v Singer, 2023 SKCA 34 clarifies the limits of police authority to enter private property—particularly in impaired driving cases.
R. v. Singer addresses whether police can enter your driveway without a warrant to investigate suspected impaired driving. The Court ultimately ruled that police conduct in this case breached the Charter. The decision reinforces the importance of respecting privacy rights on residential property and sets clear limits on how police can interact with vehicles parked in private spaces.
Charged with impaired driving after a police search? Protect your rights—call (306) 994-9522 for immediate legal help.
What Happened in R v Singer?
Police received a complaint about a possible impaired driver in a white Ford truck. Over an hour later, they found a matching truck parked in Mr. Singer’s driveway, engine running, lights on.
Without a warrant, officers:
- Entered the private driveway
- Knocked on the truck window (no response)
- Opened the doors, smelled alcohol, and woke Mr. Singer
He failed a roadside breath test but later refused to provide a sample at the station, leading to charges for refusal and impaired operation.
At trial, Mr. Singer argued the police violated his s. 8 Charter rights by trespassing onto his property to gather evidence. The trial judge disagreed, but the Court of Appeal overturned the conviction, ruling the search unlawful (Singer, paras. 2-3, 70).
Key Takeaways from R v Singer
- Police cannot enter private property to investigate a crime under the “implied licence to knock” doctrine—that rule only applies for legitimate, non-investigative purposes (like welfare checks).
- A parked car on private property still carries privacy protections—police cannot simply walk up, open your door, and gather evidence without legal justification.
- If police unlawfully search your property, the evidence may be excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter.
Your Privacy Rights Explained
1. Section 8 of the Charter: Protection Against Unreasonable Search & Seizure
Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees:
“Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.”
A search is “unreasonable” if:
- It intrudes on a reasonable expectation of privacy, and
- It is not authorized by law (e.g., warrant, demanding circumstances).
2. The “Implied Licence to Knock” Doctrine
The implied licence allows police (like any visitor) to approach a home for legitimate, non-investigative reasons, such as:
- Delivering mail
- Conducting a welfare check
- Speaking to the occupant about a non-criminal matter
However, as confirmed in R v Evans, [1996] 1 SCR 8, this licence does not extend to criminal investigations. If police enter private property to gather evidence, they exceed the licence and become trespassers (Evans, para. 9).
Does This Apply to Driveways and Parked Cars?
Yes. The Court in Singer rejected the Crown’s argument that a vehicle on private property has reduced privacy protections (Singer, para. 61).
Key factors:
- The truck was not in public view (doors closed, occupant asleep).
- Police had no warrant and no exigent circumstances (e.g., immediate danger).
- Their sole purpose was investigative—not to communicate (Singer, para. 63).
Facing charges after a questionable police search? Call (306) 994-9522 for a free case review.
Breaking Down the Ruling
1. Police Conduct Was a Search
The Court of Appeal found that the officers entered Mr. Singer’s private driveway to gather evidence, not merely to communicate. That conduct went beyond the scope of any implied licence and constituted a warrantless search (para. 67).
2. Mr. Singer Had a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
Even though he was in a vehicle (which normally carries a lower privacy expectation than a home), Mr. Singer was not on a public road. He was asleep in his truck, parked in his own driveway. The Court ruled that he had a constitutionally protected privacy interest in this setting (paras. 59–61).
3. Ancillary Police Powers Did Not Justify the Entry
The Crown argued that police were acting in the interest of public safety. But the Court found no evidence that officers feared an imminent threat or that exigent circumstances existed. The ancillary powers doctrine could not justify the breach (paras. 68–69).
4. Evidence Was Excluded Under Section 24(2)
Because the breath test was obtained through an unlawful search, the Court excluded it under section 24(2) of the Charter. This section allows courts to exclude evidence if admitting it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute (para. 98).
What Should You Do If Police Search Your Property?
- Ask if they have a warrant. If not, you can (politely) state:
“I do not consent to any search of my property.” - Do not resist physically—but note details (e.g., officers’ names, what they did).
- Contact a lawyer immediately to challenge any evidence obtained unlawfully.
If police entered your property without legal authority, your criminal lawyer can file a Charter challenge to exclude evidence, argue the search violated s. 8, and push for a reduced sentence or case dismissal.
Have You Been Charged with Impaired Driving?
An experienced criminal defence lawyer is essential when facing an impaired driving charge. A criminal defence lawyer can help you navigate the complexities of the legal system, protect your rights, and develop a strong defence strategy tailored to your case.
Need a Criminal Defence Lawyer? Get a Free Legal Consultation With Nicholas Robinson, Criminal Defence Lawyer
Don’t hesitate to reach out to us if you have been charged with impaired driving. Call (306) 994-9522, and a skilled criminal defence lawyer will discuss your case with you and explore your options.