The accused were charged with multiple offences related to a cocaine-trafficking ring.
The Crown's case relied heavily on wiretap evidence obtained via an ex parte authorization supported by a lengthy police affidavit.
At trial, cross-examination revealed errors in the affidavit regarding confidential sources, leading the trial judge to reject the entire affidavit, exclude the wiretap evidence, and acquit the accused.
The Court of Appeal set aside the acquittals and ordered a new trial.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the accused's appeal, clarifying that the investigative necessity requirement for wiretaps means there must be no other reasonable alternative method of investigation.
The Court held that the affidavit met this standard and that the trial judge erred in applying the standard of review by globally rejecting the affidavit instead of excising the erroneous information and considering whether sufficient reliable information remained to support the authorization.
