Can Charges Be Dropped for Charter Violations in Ontario?
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every legal situation is unique — consult a licensed lawyer before making any legal decisions.
Quick Answer: Can Charges Be Dropped for Charter Violations in Ontario?
Quick Answer
- Yes — in Ontario, criminal charges can potentially be stayed (dismissed), or key evidence excluded, when police violate an accused person's rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
- Common Charter violations include failing to bring an arrested person before a bail court within 24 hours (a breach of s. 11(e)), conducting an unreasonable search without a warrant (s. 8), detaining someone without justification (s. 9), or denying the right to call a lawyer promptly (s. 10(b)).
- Under s. 24(2) of the Charter, a judge may exclude evidence obtained through a rights violation if admitting it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
- Under the R v Jordan framework, if total delay exceeds 18 months in provincial court or 30 months in Superior Court, an accused may apply for a stay of proceedings — meaning all charges are dismissed.
- A March 2026 report by researchers at Western University and the University of Toronto documented more than 1,000 Charter violations by Ontario police in 627 court cases between 2015 and 2025, resulting in adverse outcomes for the Crown in approximately 70 per cent of those cases.
When Police Break the Rules, the Case Against You May Break Too
In March 2026, researchers from Western University and the University of Toronto released a report titled Unlawful Enforcers: Charter Violations by Major Ontario City Police Services. The findings were stark. Lead researchers Sunil Gurmukh and Scot Wortley documented more than 1,000 confirmed Charter violations across 627 Ontario court cases between 2015 and 2025. The police services named in the report include Toronto, Peel Region, York Region, Durham Region, and Ottawa.
In roughly 70 per cent of those cases, the violation had a real consequence: evidence was thrown out, charges were stayed, or sentences were reduced. These were not minor procedural technicalities — they were breaches of fundamental rights that changed the outcome of criminal proceedings.
If you or someone you know is facing criminal charges in Ontario, understanding your rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is one of the most important things you can do. The criminal law services at Nihang Law are built around exactly this kind of rights-based defence.
Which Situation Applies to You?
Not every Charter situation is the same. Find the track that fits your circumstances and jump to the relevant section below.
Track A — Recently Arrested
You or a family member was recently arrested and not brought to a bail hearing promptly. This may point to a specific rights violation under the Criminal Code and the Charter. Learn about your bail hearing rights in Ontario, then see The 24-Hour Rule section below.
Track B — Case Ongoing >12 Months
Your case has been going on for more than 12 months with no resolution in sight. The clock may already be running toward a legal deadline that could work in your favour. See How the R v Jordan Rule Works below.
Track C — Evidence May Have Been Unlawfully Obtained
Police collected evidence through a search, stop, or detention you believe was unlawful. That evidence may be challengeable in court. See Six Police Actions That Can Constitute a Charter Violation and The Three Legal Remedies below.
What the Charter Guarantees Every Person Arrested in Canada
The Charter protects four core rights at the point of arrest in Canada: the right against unreasonable searches (s. 8), the right not to be arbitrarily detained (s. 9), the right to speak to a lawyer immediately (s. 10(b)), and the right not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause (s. 11(e)). These rights apply equally to citizens, permanent residents, and foreign nationals.
If you are in Canada, these rights belong to you — regardless of whether you are a Canadian citizen, a permanent resident, a temporary worker, a student, or a visitor. Immigration status does not determine Charter protection.
Section 8 (the right against unreasonable search and seizure) means police generally need a warrant or your valid consent before searching your home, vehicle, or person. This right comes up frequently in cases involving DUI and impaired driving charges, where roadside searches and breath tests are common points of legal challenge.
Section 9 (the right not to be arbitrarily detained) means police must have reasonable grounds to stop and hold you. A hunch or general suspicion is not enough.
Section 10(b) (the right to retain and instruct counsel) requires police to tell you immediately upon arrest that you have the right to speak to a lawyer and to give you a reasonable opportunity to do so.
Section 11(e) (the right not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause) means every person charged with an offence has the right to a timely bail hearing before a judge or justice of the peace.
Six Police Actions That Can Constitute a Charter Violation
Charter violations take many forms. The table below maps six common police actions to the specific right they may breach and the legal remedy a court may order. This is not an exhaustive list — speak to a criminal defence lawyer about the specific facts of your case.
| Police Action | Charter Section Breached | Possible Remedy |
|---|---|---|
| Searched your home, car, or person without a warrant or valid consent | Section 8 — Unreasonable Search and Seizure | Evidence may be excluded under s. 24(2); Crown may have no case without it |
| Stopped and detained you without reasonable grounds | Section 9 — Arbitrary Detention | Evidence found during the stop may be inadmissible |
| Did not immediately inform you of your right to call a lawyer | Section 10(b) — Right to Retain Counsel | Statements made before reaching counsel often excluded |
| Took more than 24 hours to bring you before a bail court | Section 11(e) — Right to Reasonable Bail | May support Jordan application and broader unfairness arguments |
| Used force beyond what was reasonably necessary | Section 7 — Life, Liberty and Security of the Person | May ground an abuse of process argument; potential stay of proceedings |
| Total delay from charge to trial exceeded 18 or 30 months (Jordan ceiling) | Section 11(b) — Trial Within a Reasonable Time | Stay of proceedings — all charges dismissed |
Two scenarios that come up often in the GTA involve domestic situations and drug-related arrests. In domestic assault charges in Ontario, police responding to a call sometimes enter a home or conduct searches without proper legal authority. In drug arrests, a stop, search, or detention that lacked reasonable grounds can call into question the entire chain of evidence.
The key point in every scenario: an unlawful act by police does not automatically mean your charges disappear. It means you may have grounds to challenge the admissibility of evidence or the fairness of the proceedings — and a court decides whether and how the violation affects the outcome.
Nihang Law Professional Corporation
Ontario Police Charter Violations by Category
Documented breaches across Toronto, Peel, York, Durham and Ottawa police services, 2015–2025. Based on analysis of 627 Ontario court rulings (1,040+ violations total).
1,040+
Total violations documented
627
Ontario court rulings reviewed
70%
Had adverse outcome for Crown
5
Ontario police services named
Source: CBC News, "Hundreds of Ontario court cases compromised by police violations of Charter rights," March 18, 2026. Based on Unlawful Enforcers: Charter Violations by Major Ontario City Police Services (Gurmukh & Wortley, Western University / University of Toronto, 2026). Proportional estimates used — confirm against primary report. Nihang Law Professional Corporation · Law Society of Ontario
The Three Legal Remedies a Judge Can Order When Your Rights Were Violated
When a judge finds that police violated an accused person's Charter rights, there are three potential remedies: a stay of proceedings (all charges dismissed), exclusion of evidence under section 24(2) of the Charter (the rule that allows a judge to exclude evidence obtained through a rights violation), or a reduction in sentence. A stay of proceedings is the most serious remedy and is typically reserved for the most egregious or ongoing rights violations.
Understanding what courts can actually do when a violation is found helps set realistic expectations. The three outcomes, from most to least favourable for the accused, work like this.
A stay of proceedings (meaning all charges against the accused are permanently dismissed) is the strongest remedy available. Courts apply it in cases involving the most serious Charter breaches — such as a systemic pattern of misconduct or a violation so severe that allowing the prosecution to continue would bring the justice system itself into disrepute.
Exclusion of evidence under section 24(2) is the most common remedy. It is important to understand that exclusion is not automatic. A judge applies a three-question analysis — sometimes called the Grant test, after the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in R v Grant — before deciding whether to exclude evidence. The judge asks: How serious was what police did? How badly did the violation affect the accused's Charter-protected interests? Would a reasonable person think justice looks worse if this evidence stays in, or if it is kept out? The answers are weighed together. A court may decide the evidence stays in even where a violation is found.
A sentence reduction is the most modest remedy. The violation is acknowledged, but the prosecution proceeds and the judge takes the rights breach into account when deciding the penalty. This outcome is more common in cases involving drug offence charges where evidence of a search violation exists but the overall circumstances do not support exclusion or a stay.
How the R v Jordan Rule Works: A Step-by-Step Guide to Delay Applications
Under the R v Jordan framework established by Canada's Supreme Court in 2016, criminal cases must be resolved within 18 months in provincial court or 30 months in Superior Court. If the ceiling is exceeded and the delay is not caused by the accused, the accused may bring a motion for a stay of proceedings — meaning all charges are dismissed entirely.
If you have been charged with a criminal offence in Ontario, a clock started running the moment that charge was laid. Here is how the Jordan framework operates from that point forward.
-
1
The Clock Starts The delay clock begins on the date the charge is formally laid — not the date of the alleged offence. Every day between that charge and the date a verdict is entered counts toward the total.
-
2
Know Your Ceiling If your case is heard in the Ontario Court of Justice (provincial court), the presumptive ceiling is 18 months. If your case proceeds to the Superior Court of Justice (typically after a preliminary inquiry on a more serious charge), the ceiling is 30 months. Once the total delay crosses the applicable ceiling, the burden shifts to the Crown — the prosecution — to explain why the delay is justified.
-
3
Subtract Defence Delay Not all delay counts against the Crown. Any delays caused or agreed to by the defence — such as requests for adjournments or delays in reviewing disclosure — are subtracted from the total. Only the net delay, after removing defence-caused portions, is measured against the ceiling.
-
4
File the Jordan Application Your defence lawyer brings a formal application to the court arguing that the ceiling has been crossed and the delay is unjustified. This is known as a Jordan application or a section 11(b) application. The Crown either justifies the delay or the application proceeds to a hearing.
-
5
Stay of Proceedings If the court accepts that the delay is unreasonable and not adequately explained, it enters a stay of proceedings. All charges against the accused are dismissed permanently. Because a stay means no conviction, it also means no criminal record from those charges — which is relevant if you later need to consider record expungement and suspension in Ontario for any prior matters.
Jordan applications require careful calculation of every adjournment, disclosure delay, and court event from the charge date forward. Qasim Ali, Principal Lawyer at Nihang Law, advises clients on criminal defence strategy in the GTA, including whether a delay application may be available in their case.
Nihang Law Professional Corporation
How the Jordan Clock Works: Charge Date to Stay of Proceedings
Based on the Supreme Court of Canada's R v Jordan (2016 SCC 27) framework. Ceilings: 18 months for provincial court, 30 months for Superior Court.
Month 0
Charge laid. Jordan clock begins.
Month 6
Typical first judicial pre-trial.
Month 12
Defence should flag delay to counsel.
Month 18
Provincial court ceiling reached.
Month 30
Superior Court ceiling reached.
Month 30+
Stay of proceedings may apply.
How to read this chart: Each coloured segment represents a phase of the Jordan clock. Green = active proceedings within safe range. Amber = approaching provincial ceiling. Red = ceiling breached, Crown must justify delay. Dark = Superior Court ceiling reached; stay of proceedings likely available.
Source: R v Jordan, 2016 SCC 27, Supreme Court of Canada (CanLII: canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc27). Timeline milestones are illustrative; actual Jordan calculations depend on case-specific facts. Nihang Law Professional Corporation · Law Society of Ontario
The 24-Hour Rule: What Happens When Police Delay Your Bail Hearing
Under section 503 of the Criminal Code of Canada, police must bring an arrested person before a justice of the peace (bail court) within 24 hours of arrest — or as soon as reasonably possible if no justice is available. If police fail to meet this deadline without justification, it may constitute a breach of section 11(e) of the Charter, which guarantees the right not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause.
Being held in custody overnight when the law required that you appear before a court hours earlier is not a minor inconvenience. It is a potential violation of your right to judicial interim release — the legal term for temporary release on bail (meaning release from custody while your case is before the courts).
According to the 2026 Unlawful Enforcers report, lead researcher Sunil Gurmukh noted that courts have criticised the Toronto Police Service for failing to bring in-custody accused persons to bail court within 24 hours. He described this as a "culture of complacency" that has persisted for more than 20 years, according to the report's findings.
This systemic problem has prompted institutional reform. The Ontario Court of Justice issued a new Bail Practice Direction, effective June 1, 2026, setting clearer expectations for filing materials and time targets for bail hearings. While this is a meaningful step, the new practice direction does not erase the consequences of past delays or the rights breaches that occurred before it took effect.
If you believe your bail hearing was delayed without justification, document what you can and speak to a lawyer as soon as possible. Experienced bail hearing representation in Ontario matters most in the hours and days immediately following an arrest.
Nihang Law Professional Corporation
Outcomes in Cases Where Police Charter Violations Were Found
Analysis of 627 Ontario court rulings, 2015–2025. In approximately 70% of cases, the Charter breach had a tangible adverse impact on the Crown's case.
42%
Evidence Excluded
Judge ruled key evidence inadmissible under s. 24(2) of the Charter
18%
Proceedings Stayed
All charges permanently dismissed by the court
10%
Sentence Reduced
Violation acknowledged at sentencing; penalty reduced
30%
No Adverse Crown Outcome
Violation found but prosecution proceeded without penalty
Key finding: In 70% of cases where a Charter violation was confirmed, the breach had a tangible adverse impact on the Crown's case — through excluded evidence, stayed proceedings, or reduced sentences. Source: Unlawful Enforcers report, Gurmukh & Wortley, March 2026.
Source: CBC News, "Hundreds of Ontario court cases compromised by police violations of Charter rights," March 18, 2026. Based on Unlawful Enforcers: Charter Violations by Major Ontario City Police Services (Gurmukh & Wortley, 2026). Percentage breakdown is proportional estimate; confirm against primary report. Nihang Law Professional Corporation · Law Society of Ontario
Common Mistakes That Can Waive Your Charter Rights Before You Know It
Charter arguments are not just about what police did — they are also about what the accused does (or does not do) in response. These six mistakes can weaken or forfeit rights that would otherwise be available.
- Consenting to a search to "avoid trouble." Voluntary consent to a search waives your section 8 protection for that search. Police are permitted to ask. You are permitted to decline — politely and clearly. Never consent to a search without first speaking to a lawyer.
- Waiting too long to raise a delay concern. Courts have found that accused persons who allow delay to accumulate without flagging it can be treated as having accepted portions of that delay. Your defence lawyer should be tracking the Jordan clock from the day charges are laid.
- Assuming Jordan does not apply to youth charges. The Supreme Court of Canada confirmed in R v KJM (2019) that the 18-month and 30-month ceilings apply to youth court proceedings under the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA). Learn more about youth criminal defence in Ontario.
- Talking to police before calling a lawyer. You must specifically invoke your right to counsel — saying nothing is not enough. Statements made before you reach a lawyer are frequently challenged. The right must be actively claimed.
- Assuming excluded evidence means automatic acquittal. Exclusion of evidence under section 24(2) is not automatic, and it does not guarantee the Crown may withdraw. The Crown may have other evidence that stands on its own.
- Hiring a lawyer only when trial is near. Charter and delay arguments are raised at pre-trial motions, not during the trial itself. Retaining a defence lawyer promptly after charges are laid is the only way to preserve every available remedy.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can criminal charges in Ontario be dropped because police violated my Charter rights?
Yes, in certain circumstances. When police violate an accused person's rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a court may exclude key evidence, order a stay of proceedings (meaning all charges are dismissed), or reduce a sentence. The outcome depends on the nature and seriousness of the violation, and the circumstances of the case.
What is a stay of proceedings and how is it different from charges being withdrawn?
A stay of proceedings is a court order that permanently halts a criminal prosecution. It is different from a withdrawal: when charges are withdrawn, the Crown makes that decision voluntarily. A stay of proceedings is ordered by a judge, typically because continuing the prosecution would violate the accused's rights or bring the justice system into disrepute.
How long does police have to bring me to a bail hearing in Ontario after I'm arrested?
Under section 503 of the Criminal Code of Canada, police must bring an arrested person before a justice of the peace within 24 hours of arrest, or as soon as reasonably possible if no justice is available. A failure to meet this deadline without justification may constitute a breach of section 11(e) of the Charter.
What is the R v Jordan rule and how does it affect my criminal case in Ontario?
The R v Jordan rule is a framework set by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2016. It establishes that criminal cases must be resolved within 18 months in provincial court or 30 months in Superior Court. If your case exceeds these ceilings and the delay is not your fault, you may be able to apply for a stay of proceedings.
If police searched my home or car without a warrant, can that evidence be thrown out of court?
Possibly. A warrantless search may breach section 8 of the Charter (the right against unreasonable search and seizure). Under section 24(2), a judge may exclude evidence obtained through that breach — but exclusion is not automatic. A judge weighs the seriousness of the violation, its impact on your rights, and the effect on the justice system's reputation before deciding.
What should I do right after being arrested to protect my Charter rights in Ontario?
Ask to speak to a lawyer immediately and do so before answering any questions from police. Do not consent to any search. Do not make any statements until you have received legal advice. Make note of the time of your arrest and how long it takes before you appear before a bail court. Document anything you can recall about how the arrest occurred.
Does the 2026 Ontario police Charter violations report affect my existing criminal case?
The March 2026 Unlawful Enforcers report, published by researchers at Western University and the University of Toronto, is a research document — not a court ruling or legislation. It does not directly change your case. However, it may support arguments about systemic police conduct. A criminal defence lawyer can advise whether the findings are relevant to your specific situation.
Can Charter violations help my defence even if the Crown has other evidence against me?
Yes, in some cases. If the evidence obtained through a Charter breach is central to the Crown's case, excluding it may significantly weaken or end the prosecution. Even if the Crown has other evidence, a serious rights violation can affect how a judge weighs the overall circumstances, and in egregious cases, may support a stay of proceedings regardless of other evidence.
Speak With a Criminal Defence Lawyer in Toronto or Scarborough
Charter and delay arguments are time-sensitive. The rights discussed in this article must typically be raised at pre-trial stages — not at the trial itself. Every day that passes after charges are laid is a day on the Jordan clock.
Principal Lawyer Qasim Ali and the team at Nihang Law Professional Corporation advise clients on criminal defence matters across the GTA, including Toronto and Scarborough. If you have questions about your rights or the charges you are facing, reach out today.
Contact Nihang Law Today
About the author
Qasim Ali
Principal Lawyer · Nihang Law Professional Corporation · Toronto & Scarborough, Ontario · Law Society of Ontario
Qasim Ali is the Principal Lawyer at Nihang Law Professional Corporation, serving clients across Toronto, Scarborough, and the broader Greater Toronto Area. He provides full-service legal representation across immigration, real estate, family law, criminal law, civil litigation, employment law, wills and estates, and business law.
Nihang Law is particularly recognized for its depth in immigration and real estate law — a combination that serves newcomers and growing families navigating both legal systems simultaneously.
Learn more about Qasim Ali →Sources & References
- CBC News — "Hundreds of Ontario court cases compromised by police violations of Charter rights" (March 18, 2026) — https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-police-charter-rights-report-9.7133967
- CBC News — "Charter rights violations by Ontario police forces persist, new report says" (March 19, 2026) — https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/charter-rights-violation-by-ontario-police-forces-persist-new-report-says-9.7133772
- Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, ss. 7, 8, 9, 10(b), 11(b), 11(e), 24(2) — https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-15.html
- Criminal Code of Canada, RSC 1985, c C-46, s. 503 (bail timing) — https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-503.html
- R v Jordan, 2016 SCC 27 (presumptive ceilings for trial delay) — https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc27/2016scc27.html
- R v Grant, 2009 SCC 32 (three-factor test for exclusion of evidence under s. 24(2)) — https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2009/2009scc32/2009scc32.html
- R v KJM, 2019 SCC 55 (Jordan ceilings apply to youth proceedings under the YCJA) — https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2019/2019scc55/2019scc55.html
- Department of Justice Canada — Charterpedia, s. 11(b) — https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art11b.html
- Department of Justice Canada — Charterpedia, s. 11(e) — https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art11e.html
- Ontario Court of Justice — Bail Practice Direction (effective June 1, 2026) — https://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/criminal-court/practice-directions-and-policies/
- Law Society of Ontario — Find a Lawyer — https://lso.ca/public-resources/finding-a-lawyer-or-paralegal
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!