2 total
The accused was convicted of producing marijuana after surveillance and his use of a remote garage door opener established his knowledge and control of a grow operation.
The accused was charged with unlawfully producing cannabis contrary to section 7(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.
Following a voir dire on a Garofoli application and Charter challenge, the court admitted evidence from a search warrant executed at the accused's residence.
The Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused exercised knowledge and control over a sophisticated marijuana grow operation discovered at the premises, based on surveillance evidence showing the accused's repeated attendance at the house, his use of a remote garage door opener to gain access, the extended periods he spent inside the house, and the sophisticated nature of the grow operation.
The court found the accused guilty.
The court upheld a search warrant for a marijuana grow operation, finding minor omissions in the ITO did not invalidate the reasonable grounds for its issuance.
The Crown executed a search warrant at the accused's residence and discovered a marijuana grow operation with over 1,000 plants.
The accused challenged the validity of the search warrant, arguing that the Information to Obtain (ITO) lacked reasonable grounds and breached his Charter section 8 rights against unreasonable search and seizure.
The court conducted a detailed review of the ITO, examining allegations of material omissions, misleading information, and deficiencies raised by the defence.
The court found that while the ITO contained minor omissions and could have included more detail, the affiant was not acting in bad faith and the core substance of the ITO provided sufficient grounds for the justice of the peace to issue the warrant.
The application was dismissed and the evidence was admitted.
