Donald J. Avison

The appellant appealed a decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal, which had set aside an acquittal on a charge of conspiracy to traffic in a narcotic and ordered a new trial.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal for the reasons given by the Court of Appeal of Alberta.

The appellant was seized by the throat by a police officer in a pub and found to be in possession of a balloon containing heroin.

The trial judge found the search unreasonable under s 8 of the Charter because the Crown failed to establish the officer's reasonable grounds, but admitted the evidence under s 24(2).

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial, holding that the admission of the evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute given the seriousness of the Charter violation and the lack of established grounds for the violent search.

The appellant's apartment was searched by police under a writ of assistance, resulting in the seizure of illicit drugs and cash.

The appellant argued the search violated section 8 of the Charter and sought to exclude the evidence under section 24(2).

Assuming the search was unreasonable because writs of assistance were constitutionally inadequate, the Supreme Court of Canada applied the principles from R. v. Collins.

The Court concluded that admitting the evidence would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute, as the officers acted in good faith under a statute not yet declared unconstitutional and had reasonable grounds for the search.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant's apartment was searched by police under the authority of a writ of assistance, resulting in the seizure of illicit drugs.

At trial, the judge found writs of assistance to be unconstitutional, excluded the evidence under section 24(2) of the Charter, and acquitted the appellant.

The Court of Appeal quashed the acquittal and ordered a new trial.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that although the search was unreasonable, the police acted in good faith reliance on a writ of assistance that had not yet been challenged under the Charter.

Applying the Collins framework, the Court concluded that the admission of the evidence would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute.