Chris Walsh

A ruling on the admissibility of data extracted from Blackberry devices seized from the accused during a drug importation investigation.

The Crown sought to introduce a DVD containing photographs, contact lists, call logs, SMS text messages, and Blackberry PIN messages extracted from two Blackberries in the possession of one accused.

The defence challenged admissibility on grounds that the Crown failed to authenticate the contents, failed to comply with the electronic documents provisions of the Canada Evidence Act, and that prejudicial value outweighed probative value.

The court found that the electronic documents provisions applied, that authentication was established through circumstantial evidence and chain of continuity, and that the presumption of integrity under the Act was satisfied.

The evidence was admitted as real evidence, documents in possession, circumstantial evidence of conspiracy, and admissions.

Sentencing for importing approximately 4.2 kilograms of cocaine into Canada and possession of a credit card writer device.

The offender refused to cooperate with a pre-sentence report and maintained that he was outside the authority of the court.

The court considered the sentencing range for cocaine importation established in prior appellate authority and determined the offender should not be treated as a mere courier, noting the large quantity of drugs, possession of fraud equipment, and a serious prior criminal record involving firearms and violence.

Emphasizing denunciation and deterrence in large-scale drug importation, the court imposed a nine-year penitentiary sentence for importing cocaine with a concurrent one-year sentence for possession of the credit card writer.

Credit of 1.5-to-1 was granted for 398 days of pre-trial custody.

The appellant appealed summary conviction findings of guilt for making false or deceptive statements and wilfully evading compliance with reporting provisions under the Customs Act in connection with the importation of a motor vehicle.

The trial judge found that the appellant deliberately structured the shipment of a prohibited kit car into two separate shipments and falsely described the goods as automotive parts in order to circumvent importation rules.

On appeal, the appellant argued errors in the interpretation of the Customs Act and related regulations, improper rejection of tariff classification arguments, and alleged violations of Charter rights.

The appeal court held that the case was not about tariff classification but about knowingly making false declarations to customs officials.

Finding no legal error, misapprehension of evidence, or Charter breach, the court upheld the convictions.