R. v. D.M., 2012 ONCA 894 is a source for the principle that the confession rule applies prior to arrest or detention:
 When the appellant was interviewed by Sutton, he was not under arrest, nor was he detained. His rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedomswere not triggered. However, I agree with the appellant that when he was interviewed, he was a suspect, indeed, the target of a criminal investigation. Therefore, the common law confessions rule, described by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Oickle, 2000 SCC 38,  2 S.C.R. 3, applies. The confessions rule requires the Crown to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that a confession made by a suspect to a person in authority, such as the admission in this case, was voluntary: R. v. Oickle, at para. 30.