Following execution of search warrants at two Toronto residences, the accused challenged the admissibility of seized drugs, cash, and paraphernalia under ss. 8, 10(a), and 10(b) of the Charter.
The court held that the ITO, after amplification and excision, could not support the Keele Street warrant but did support the Jane Street warrant; it also found breaches arising from the police failure to fully inform the accused of the drug investigation, failure to facilitate timely access to counsel of choice, and a seventeen-month delay in filing the Jane Street Report to a Justice under s. 489.1 of the Criminal Code.
Applying Grant, the court excluded the Keele Street evidence but admitted the Jane Street evidence.
On the trial proper, the Crown's case on possession rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, and the court found a reasonable inference remained that another resident had hidden the drugs without the accused's knowledge.
The charges were dismissed.
