The accused brought a Charter application under s. 8 to exclude wiretap evidence and items seized during a search of a residence, arguing that a Part VI authorization was facially invalid.
The authorization was obtained during an investigation into a corrupt police officer who was allegedly fixing traffic tickets and associating with individuals involved in illicit marijuana production.
The court found that the authorization was valid, as there were reasonable grounds to believe that intercepting the accused's communications would assist the investigation.
The Charter application was dismissed, and the court noted in obiter that even if a breach had occurred, the evidence would not have been excluded under s. 24(2).
