K. Benzakein

The Crown applied for the forfeiture of a $70,000 recognizance after the accused breached his bail conditions by violating his curfew and driving impaired.

The court found that both sureties had been diligent.

The court granted full relief from forfeiture to one surety because the Crown had unreasonably refused to allow her to supervise the accused at night, which might have prevented the breach.

The other surety was ordered to forfeit $10,000, receiving substantial relief due to her diligence and the Crown's role in preventing a more effective release plan.

Police conducted surveillance on a residence linked through confidential informants to a suspected large‑scale cocaine trafficker.

Officers observed an individual leave the residence carrying a shoebox, meet briefly with the accused in a vehicle, and transfer the box before the accused drove away.

The accused was arrested shortly afterward and police discovered a kilogram of cocaine in the shoebox during a vehicle search.

The accused argued the arrest lacked reasonable and probable grounds and that the search violated ss. 8 and 9 of the Charter.

The court held that the informant information, combined with police surveillance and the officer’s experience in drug investigations, established objectively reasonable grounds for arrest and justified the search incident to arrest.

The Charter application was dismissed and the seized cocaine was admitted as evidence.