In a criminal trial, the self-represented accused sought exclusion of cell phone evidence following his arrest in the public lounge of an emergency shelter on charges arising from threatening emails to an elected official.
The court held that, although the accused subjectively viewed the shelter as his home, he had no objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in the shared, openly accessible, supervised lounge area.
The arrest was supported by reasonable grounds and was not arbitrary, and the seizure of the phone was a valid search incident to lawful arrest followed by a judicially authorized forensic search.
In the alternative, even if ss. 8 or 9 had been breached, the evidence would have been admitted under the Grant framework.
