The appellant, Matthew Shedden, appealed his convictions for various drug offences, arguing that the search warrant used to obtain evidence was invalid.
The challenge at trial, which contended there were no reasonable and probable grounds to believe drugs would be found at the residence (his mother's home), was unsuccessful.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that even if the trial judge applied an incorrect legal standard or provided insufficient reasons, the record amply supported the valid issuance of the search warrant.
The court concluded that reasonable inferences could be drawn from the appellant's observed conduct, including frequent visits to the residence between suspected drug transactions, to establish the necessary reasonable grounds.
