Barrington Grant brought an application under sections 8 and 24(2) of the Charter to challenge the validity of a search warrant for a rental vehicle he was driving and to exclude a firearm found therein.
The court addressed whether Grant had standing to challenge the warrant and whether the Information to Obtain (ITO) properly disclosed reasonable probable grounds for the search.
The court found that Grant did have standing but concluded that the ITO, when read holistically, established the necessary reasonable grounds, despite some conditional language used by the affiant.
Consequently, the application to invalidate the search warrant failed, and the firearm was deemed admissible at trial.
