The two-step Stillman test was developed for determining whether the admission of evidence that was obtained through a breach of a Charter right would affect the fairness of the trial.

The issue of trial fairness comes into play when applying the first step of the Collins test to exclude evidence under section 24(2).

On the first step, the question is whether "the accused was compelled to make a statement or provide a bodily substance in violation of the Charter."

McLachlin agreed with the majority that the taking of hair samples, buccal swabs, and dental impressions were serious violations under section 8.

Section 24(2), McLachlin stated, requires balancing of all the circumstances of the case with the effect of admitting the evidence on the reputation of the system.

On the facts, McLachlin held that the lower courts properly weighed the factors and that they were correct in admitting the evidence.

In 2009, the Supreme Court of Canada found that the analysis of conscripted versus non-conscripted evidence was leading to inconsistent results in analyzing section 24(2), and created a new test in R v Grant