The appellant was convicted at trial of trafficking in cocaine and possession of proceeds of crime based primarily on identification evidence from an undercover buy officer and a surveillance officer.
The Alberta Court of Appeal majority affirmed the conviction, while a dissenting judge would have ordered a new trial on the basis that the trial judge should have conducted a voir dire on the admissibility of the identification evidence and reviewed the video and photo herself.
The Supreme Court of Canada majority dismissed the appeal substantially for the reasons of the Court of Appeal majority, adding that the combination of the buy officer's evidence, the surveillance officer's evidence, and defence counsel's concession regarding the person arrested provided sufficient admissible evidence to support the conviction.
One judge dissented and would have allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial.
