The accused was charged with multiple robberies and firearms offences.
At the outset of his trial, he brought a Charter application alleging breaches of his ss. 8, 9, and 10(b) rights, seeking to exclude a firearm, ammunition, and a cell phone seized upon his arrest.
The accused argued that the police lacked reasonable grounds for his warrantless arrest and that his right to counsel was unjustifiably suspended while police obtained a search warrant for his residence.
The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the application, finding that the arresting officer had subjective and objective reasonable grounds to arrest the accused based on a constellation of factors linking him to the robberies.
The court also held that the 11-hour suspension of the accused's right to counsel was justified by officer and public safety concerns regarding an outstanding firearm, and that the accused failed to exercise due diligence in contacting counsel thereafter.
As no Charter breaches were established, the evidence was not excluded.