David Levy

The applicant, charged with drug and firearm offences following a robbery investigation, brought a Charter application alleging his s. 8 rights were breached by a police search of a residence.

The court found the Information to Obtain (ITO) the search warrant lacked a sufficient evidentiary nexus connecting the applicant to the searched premises.

Consequently, the search violated the applicant's s. 8 rights.

Applying the Grant framework under s. 24(2), the court concluded that the serious nature of the Charter-infringing conduct and the high expectation of privacy in a residence outweighed society's interest in adjudicating the case on its merits.

The evidence seized during the search was excluded.

The Crown applied to admit a video statement of a deceased complainant under the principled exception to the hearsay rule in a historical sexual assault case.

The court found the statement lacked procedural reliability as it was not under oath and the complainant was not warned about the consequences of lying.

Substantive reliability was also lacking due to the complainant's mental health issues, potential motive to fabricate, and implausible details.

The corroborative evidence from siblings and the accused was insufficient to overcome the hearsay dangers.

The application was dismissed.