The defendant challenged a search warrant executed on March 10, 2005, as violating section 8 of the Charter.
The defendant raised four categories of complaints: (1) the use of hydro records obtained without a warrant; (2) insufficient reasonable and probable grounds for the search; (3) misconduct by the affiant detective in securing the warrant; and (4) improper authorization and execution in evening hours.
The court found that while the hydro records were properly obtained, the warrant lacked reasonable and probable grounds because the credibility foundation for the informant information was insufficient.
The court excluded all evidence obtained pursuant to the unconstitutional search under section 24(2) of the Charter.
