Christopher De Sa

The accused was charged with multiple offences including possession of drugs for the purpose of trafficking and possession of a loaded firearm after police executed a search warrant at an apartment.

The accused argued he did not have possession of the items as he had been kicked out of the apartment by the lessee a week prior.

The court found that circumstantial evidence, including the accused's ongoing access, personal belongings, and statements to undercover officers, proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he had knowledge and a measure of control over the illicit items.

The accused was found guilty on all counts.

The accused, charged with multiple drug and firearms offences, brought a motion to invalidate a search warrant and exclude evidence under sections 8 and 24(2) of the Charter.

The accused argued that the Information to Obtain (ITO) contained material errors and misleading statements, and that a dynamic, unannounced entry was unjustified.

The court found that despite minor errors, the ITO contained sufficient reliable evidence to justify the issuance of the warrant, including undercover drug purchases and observations linking the accused to the searched apartment.

The court concluded there was no section 8 Charter breach, and alternatively, that the evidence should not be excluded under section 24(2) as the police acted in good faith and the evidence was highly reliable.

The application was dismissed.