2 total
Fentanyl and videotaped statement excluded from evidence due to systemic police breaches of Charter rights.
The accused brought Charter applications challenging the lawfulness of his detention and the admissibility of evidence obtained during a police investigation.
Police officers approached the accused's vehicle parked on school grounds late at night, ostensibly to conduct a sobriety check and enforce trespass laws.
During the encounter, officers detected cannabis and observed cash in the vehicle.
They searched the vehicle under the Cannabis Control Act and discovered fentanyl in the centre console.
The accused was arrested and subsequently provided a videotaped statement to police.
The court found that while the initial detention was lawful, the police violated the accused's Charter rights under sections 10(a) and 10(b) by failing to inform him of the reasons for his detention and his right to counsel.
The court excluded both the fentanyl and the videotaped statement from evidence under section 24(2) of the Charter, finding that admission would bring the administration of justice into disrepute due to systemic Charter breaches by the Peel Regional Police.
The court ordered the civil forfeiture of $48,575 found in a vehicle alongside indicia of drug trafficking.
The Attorney General of Ontario applied for a forfeiture order under the Civil Remedies Act, 2001, regarding $48,575 in Canadian currency seized by police.
The Attorney General argued the currency was proceeds and/or an instrument of unlawful activity.
An interested party, Mathew Ross-Young, claimed the funds were legitimate life savings and sought dismissal of the application.
The court, applying the balance of probabilities standard, found the currency to be proceeds and an instrument of unlawful activity, citing suspicious circumstances including large bundled cash, proximity to drugs and drug paraphernalia, inconsistent explanations from the interested party, and a lack of credible financial records.
The court emphasized that forfeiture under the Civil Remedies Act is a civil matter not requiring criminal charges or convictions, and that police opinion evidence is admissible.
The court found no "interests of justice" considerations to weigh against forfeiture and granted the application, ordering the forfeiture of the currency to the Crown.
