During a trial for possession for the purpose of trafficking, the Crown applied to admit expert opinion evidence from a police officer regarding whether the accused's possession of Oxycodone and fentanyl patches was for the purpose of trafficking.
The court ruled the evidence inadmissible.
The officer's opinion on the Oxycodone lacked probative value because he conceded the quantity was equally consistent with legitimate prescription use as with trafficking.
Regarding the fentanyl, the court found the officer lacked the necessary medical knowledge and experience with prescription patterns to provide a reliable expert opinion, noting that a doctor or pharmacist would be the appropriate expert.
