The accused was charged with two counts of possession of child pornography.
The Crown's case depended on evidence obtained through a warrantless search and seizure of the accused's computer at a repair shop, followed by searches pursuant to warrants.
The defence challenged the admissibility of all evidence on Charter grounds, arguing violations of section 8 (unreasonable search and seizure).
The court found multiple Charter breaches: the warrantless search at the repair shop lacked reasonable and probable grounds and lawful authority; the warrantless seizure was tainted by the illegal search; and the police failed to file a required Report to a Justice.
However, the court admitted the evidence under section 24(2) of the Charter, finding that while the breaches were serious, their practical impact on the accused's Charter-protected interests was modest, and exclusion would not serve the long-term repute of the administration of justice.
The accused was convicted on both counts.
