Carter Martel.

Good morning, Chief Justice, Justices.

The Empowerment Council is participating in this appeal because sentencing courts need guidance about how to approach the sentencing of people with serious mental health issues.

We make three submissions.

First, evidence of a mental health condition may be relevant to sentencing in two distinct ways: as part of the circumstances of the offense that bear on moral culpability, and as part of the circumstances of the offender that bear on the individualization of the sentence.

In many cases, mental health evidence will be relevant to both, but either one triggers the need for meaningful engagement in the sentencing analysis.

Second, sentencing courts must guard against over-reliance on a sentence range where mental health is a significant factor.

And where there's a significant difference in the circumstances of the offender, that should be reflected in the range.

Carter Martel.

Chief Justice, Justices.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association submits that the threshold for a safety search of an individual who is freely interacting with police is reasonable grounds to believe in an imminent safety risk.

Individuals have a high expectation of privacy in their person and property in interactions with police where they are not under arrest or detention and may not even be suspected of any crime.

Individuals have a reasonable expectation that while freely interacting with police, whether as a witness, a victim, or on a non-criminal infraction, they will not be subject to a pat down or a search of their pockets unless police identify some specific and pressing safety concern.

In Mann, discussing the power of investigative detention, this court recognized, quote, "The potential for abuse inherent in such low visibility exercises of discretionary power." These comments apply with equal force to safety searches of non-detained individuals.

Such searches will often happen out of sight and out of reach of the courts because in many cases they will not result in charges.

Carter and Martel.

Chief Justice, Justices.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association submits that the threshold for a safety search of an individual who is freely interacting with police is reasonable grounds to believe in an imminent safety risk.

Individuals have a high expectation of privacy in their person and property in interactions with police where they are not under arrest or detention, and may not even be suspected of any crime.

Individuals have a reasonable expectation that while freely interacting with police, whether as a witness, a victim, or on a non-criminal infraction, they will not be subject to a pat-down or a search of their pockets unless police identify some specific and pressing safety concern.

In Mann, discussing the power of investigative detention, this court recognized, quote, "The potential for abuse inherent in such low visibility exercises of discretionary power." These comments apply with equal force to safety searches of non-detained individuals.

Such searches will often happen out of sight and out of reach of the courts because in many cases, they will not result in charges.