This case refers to an accused’s appeal of his convictions of wounding a law enforcement officer (police dog), resisting arrest, and carrying a concealed weapon. He had been implicated in a sexual assault and failed to cooperate with the police when they went to arrest him; he fled, which led to police deploying a law enforcement dog (unnamed) to apprehend Maurer. The accused stabbed the dog twice during a struggle, causing serious injuries.
Although the accused was ultimately acquitted of sexual assault, he was convicted of resisting arrest, wounding a law enforcement animal, and carrying concealed weapons. The accused is arguing that the police’s arrest was unlawful and further, because the police dog attacked him in an unlawful arrest, that he was entitled to fight back against the dog as it constituted an assault. He also argued it was lawful for him to be carrying the knife.
The court outlined that s 495(1)(a) of the Criminal Code authorizes an arrest without warrant where the peace officer believes on reasonable grounds that the person has committed/is about to commit an indictable offence and that R v Shinkewski determined that ‘reasonable grounds’ was more than a hunch or suspicion, but they do not have to believe it is more probable than not or beyond a reasonable doubt. Also, it was not for the accused to self-declare that the arrest was unlawful and to resist it; he was obliged to submit and dispute it afterward (para. 24). The accused’s actions during the arrest demonstrated a safety risk, giving police reason to deploy the dog to apprehend him in the lawful execution of their duty. The dog was only utilized after the accused resisted arrest by fleeing.
The appeal was dismissed, and the initial sentences for wounding law enforcement animal, carried concealed weapons, and resisting arrest upheld.
https://canlii.ca/t/k34sn