4 total
Evidence from unlawful search admitted under s. 24(2); accused convicted of firearm offences but acquitted of drug charges.
The accused was arrested on a Feeney warrant by the Emergency Task Force.
During the dynamic entry, an officer stomped on the accused's head, causing injury.
Police subsequently searched a backpack found in the unit, discovering cocaine and cash, which they used to obtain a search warrant for the unit.
The search yielded a loaded prohibited firearm, ammunition, and large quantities of drugs.
The court found breaches of the accused's s. 7 rights (excessive force) and s. 8 rights (unlawful search of the backpack and unit), but declined to exclude the evidence under s. 24(2) due to the high public interest in adjudicating the serious firearm and drug charges.
At trial, the accused was acquitted of the drug charges due to reasonable doubt about his knowledge and control of the substances, but convicted of the firearm charges based on his admission of ownership.
The court dismissed the accused's Charter applications and convicted him of firearms and drug trafficking offences based on joint possession.
The accused, Noah Spencer, was charged with five firearms offences and three drug trafficking offences.
He brought a Charter application (ss. 8, 9, 10(b)) seeking exclusion of evidence, alleging unlawful detention, search, and racial profiling by police.
The court dismissed the Charter application, finding the police acted lawfully based on reasonable suspicion and officer safety concerns, and explicitly rejecting claims of racial profiling.
The court found Spencer guilty of all firearms and drug trafficking charges, concluding he was in physical possession of the items and engaged in a joint venture with a co-accused.
Accused found guilty of drug trafficking and proceeds of crime based on constructive possession.
The accused was charged with possession of crack cocaine, possession of crack cocaine and fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking, and possession of proceeds of crime following the execution of a search warrant at a residence.
The Crown relied on circumstantial evidence to prove constructive possession of drugs and cash found in a basement bedroom closet.
The court found the accused guilty of possession of crack cocaine for the purpose of trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime, relying on the presence of his wallet, mail, and male clothing in the room.
The court found the accused not guilty of possession of fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking, but guilty of the lesser included offence of simple possession.
The accused was convicted of multiple drug trafficking charges based on circumstantial evidence linking him to a stash house.
The accused, Christopher Janisse, faced an eight-count indictment for drug trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime.
The trial proceeded on a written statement of facts.
Janisse conceded guilt on two counts of possession of cocaine for trafficking and one count of possession of proceeds of crime.
The court found him not guilty of two counts of trafficking cocaine, determining that the circumstantial evidence, while suspicious, did not meet the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
However, the court found Janisse guilty of a third trafficking count and two counts of possession of fentanyl and crystal methamphetamine for trafficking, concluding that the totality of circumstantial evidence established his knowledge and control of a drug stash house and the large quantities of drugs found.
The final judgment was guilty on counts 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8, and not guilty on counts 4 and 5.