R. v. Noble
Encyclopedia
R. v. Noble, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 874 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada
on the right to silence
under section 11(c)
of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
. The court held that the silence of an accused cannot be given any independent weight.
At trial, neither the manager nor anyone else could identify Noble. The trial judge ruled that as the trier of fact he could look at the licence given to the manager and see that it was the accused in the picture on the licence. He also ruled that the manager would have looked carefully at the licence at the time of the alleged crime. He noted that the driver's licence made a much tougher case to meet by the accused, yet the accused remained silent. The judge drew a negative inference from this silence and said it could add strength to the Crown's case. Noble was convicted, but his conviction was set aside on appeal. The Crown then appealed to the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court of Canada and is the final court of appeals in the Canadian justice system. The court grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal appellate courts, and its decisions...
on the right to silence
Right to silence
The right to remain silent is a legal right of any person. This right is recognized, explicitly or by convention, in many of the world's legal systems....
under section 11(c)
Section Eleven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Section Eleven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the section of the Canadian Constitution's Charter of Rights that protects a person's legal rights in criminal and penal matters. This includes both criminal as well as regulatory offences, as it provides rights for those accused by...
of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada. It forms the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982...
. The court held that the silence of an accused cannot be given any independent weight.
Background
A building manager found two young men, one named Sean Jeffrey Noble, in the building's parking lot. One was attempting to break into a car using a screwdriver. He asked for identification from Noble, who provided his driver's licence. The manager held onto the licence and called the police.At trial, neither the manager nor anyone else could identify Noble. The trial judge ruled that as the trier of fact he could look at the licence given to the manager and see that it was the accused in the picture on the licence. He also ruled that the manager would have looked carefully at the licence at the time of the alleged crime. He noted that the driver's licence made a much tougher case to meet by the accused, yet the accused remained silent. The judge drew a negative inference from this silence and said it could add strength to the Crown's case. Noble was convicted, but his conviction was set aside on appeal. The Crown then appealed to the Supreme Court.
Ruling of the Court
Justice Sopinka, writing for the majority, dismissed the Crown's appeal. He held that there can be no independent weight given to an accused's silence, that the accused's silence is equal to his right against self-incrimination, and that giving weight to an accused's silence violates the right to silence and the presumption of innocence under the Charter.External links
- I. Lanig, "R. v. Noble: The Supreme Court and the Permissible Use of Silence" (1998) 43 McGill L.J. 643 http://www.journal.law.mcgill.ca/abs/vol43/3laing.pdf