In a civil forfeiture proceeding, the interested party brought a motion to exclude seized currency from evidence, arguing that the search warrants for his residence and vehicle violated his section 8 Charter rights.
The court reviewed the Information to Obtain (ITO) and found that the police had established a fair probability that evidence of a crime would be found, based on the party's prior drug trafficking convictions, surveillance of hand-to-hand transactions, and the practice of separating drugs from cash.
The motion to exclude the evidence was dismissed, and costs were awarded to the Attorney General.
