Discussion Forum 10: Lesson 10 - Reasonable and probable grounds to search (2%) This assignment relates to the following Course Learning Requirements: CLR 3 - Apply Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms provisions and rules of case law references when making and using notes, gathering evidence and information from persons of various places in jeopardy to ensure the admissibility of those statements Objective of this Assignment: To discuss the concept of reasonable and probable grounds to search. Instructions: Read the following case and answer the question that follows: R. v. Yan & Chan, 2002 BCPC 574 (CanLII) On December 29, 2001, Constable Krahenbil was on general duty in the early hours of the morning. At that time the constable had been a member of the RCMP for two years, and a member of the drug section for one month. At about 5:00 a.m. he observed a dark green Dodge Caravan bearing B.C. licence plate in Coquitlam, B.C. He ran a search of the plate. It was not reported stolen. He decided to pull over the vehicle. He said he did so because there had been a cat burglar breaking into homes in the vicinity. He pulled the vehicle over and walked over to the driver's side. He noted two males in the front of the vehicle. He shone his flashlight and noticed a large white shopping bag in the middle seat of the van. He could not see what was in the bag. Both males produced identification and the driver produced the registration to the vehicle. The constable ran a check on his computer and went to return the documents. At that time the driver rolled down his window and the constable noted a strong smell of dry, skunky marihuana. He said he knew the smell from investigating 25 to 30 grow operations, although he admitted he was not an expert. He asked the driver to step out of the vehicle. He checked for any indicia of impairment and did not find any. He searched the driver for weapons or drugs. None were found on his person. He asked the driver to open the sliding door of the van. Upon the door being opened, he noted a strong odour of marihuana. He saw a white shopping bag under the middle seat. He pulled the bag and looked in and found three large Ziploc bags of dried bud, which were later identified to be marihuana. He placed both accused under arrest for possession for the purpose of trafficking. He also seized the accused's cell phone. No fingerprints of the accused were found on the drugs. The accused Yan admits his cell phone was seized. He also admits that he was the registered owner of the Dodge Caravan. On cross-examination, the constable admitted that he did not mention the cat burglar in his Report to Crown Counsel, and that the reason he stopped the accused was because he saw the accused had an outstanding production charge. He admitted that in his report he said that he did not see the white shopping bag until he started to search the vehicle. The constable also said that he did not ask the passenger, the accused Chan, to step 2 out of the vehicle prior to embarking on a search of the vehicle. He said that he was aware that he could obtain a search warrant over the telephone 24 hours a day. Did the police have reasonable and probable grounds to search the vehicle and whether there were exigent circumstances to conduct a warrantless search? Make sure you back up your answer with facts. This Forum also requires that you respond to one other student's post, in complete sentences and

Reference