The Crown applied to qualify Constable Philip Kolody as an expert witness in a drug trafficking case.
The accused opposed, citing alleged bias and lack of impartiality due to the Constable's minor involvement in a prior traffic stop related to the accused.
The court applied the three-step test for expert evidence admissibility (scope/purpose, threshold requirements, discretionary gatekeeping).
It found the evidence logically relevant and necessary, and Constable Kolody qualified.
Despite an initial discrepancy in his testimony regarding prior involvement with the accused, the court found him credible and unbiased, noting his minimal role in the traffic stop and his history of objective expert reports.
The court concluded that the potential benefits of admitting the evidence outweighed the risks.
