R v McKinnon

The case of R v McKinnon involved the accused who was stopped by police officers for traffic offences. During the stop, an officer observed a round tin in the accused's pocket and a sticker referring to a motorcycle club on the vehicle. Upon request, the accused produced the tin which contained 23 Ecstasy tablets. The court was required to determine the admissibility of this evidence in the context of the accused's criminal trial.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the evidence obtained during the illegal search should be admitted or excluded. Specifically, the court had to decide whether the police officer had the requisite belief under section 68 of the Summary Offences Act 1953, which would have rendered the search lawful. The court found that the officer did not have the necessary belief, thereby making the search illegal.

In exercising its judicial discretion, the court considered the nature of the evidence and the circumstances of its procurement. The court held that the evidence was unfairly obtained and was prejudicial to the accused. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion under relevant evidentiary principles to exclude the evidence. The outcome was that the evidence of the 23 Ecstasy tablets would not be admissible in the trial.

The final orders of the court were that the evidence obtained from the illegal search would be excluded from the trial against the accused. This decision underscores the importance of the proper execution of search and seizure procedures by law enforcement and the judiciary's role in safeguarding the rights of the accused.