2002
DOI: 10.2307/825936
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

American Constitutional Theory for Canadians (And the Rest of the World)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There is no provision in the Bill of Rights calling for exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of its provisions. The Bill of Rights thus did not become an effective instrument in protecting people’s rights and freedom (Roach, 2002; Stribopoulos, 1999). The situation changed with the adoption of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom in 1982.…”
Section: The Exclusionary Rule In Other Countriesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is no provision in the Bill of Rights calling for exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of its provisions. The Bill of Rights thus did not become an effective instrument in protecting people’s rights and freedom (Roach, 2002; Stribopoulos, 1999). The situation changed with the adoption of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom in 1982.…”
Section: The Exclusionary Rule In Other Countriesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the Bill of Rights was intended to ensure fair treatment of individuals caught up in the criminal process, it contains no mechanism to deal with evidence obtained in violation of its provisions. The lack of constitutional status and the absence of exclusionary remedy made the Bill of Rights an ineffective instrument in regulating police behavior and protecting people's freedoms (Roach, 2002;Stribopoulos, 1999).…”
Section: Canadamentioning
confidence: 99%