The police received informant tips about a marihuana grow operation at the appellant's residence.
Officers conducted a warrantless perimeter search, smelling marihuana and observing vents.
They subsequently obtained a search warrant and discovered a hydroponic grow lab.
The trial judge excluded the evidence under s. 24(2) of the Charter, finding the perimeter search violated s. 8.
The Court of Appeal reversed this decision.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that while the warrantless perimeter search violated s. 8, the search warrant was validly issued based on other compelling evidence.
The Court concluded the evidence should not be excluded under s. 24(2) as the police acted in good faith reliance on existing law.
