The appellants appealed their convictions and sentences for various drug-related offences.
The Crown's case relied entirely on intercepted communications and derived evidence.
The appellants argued the wiretap authorizations violated s. 8 of the Charter due to lack of reasonable and probable grounds and failure to demonstrate investigative necessity.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeals, finding the authorizations were properly issued and the evidence supported the convictions.
However, the Court allowed the sentence appeals, varying one appellant's intermittent sentence to time served due to post-sentencing progress, and adjusting the other's intermittent sentence schedule to accommodate employment.
