Michael N. Jones

The accused brought a pretrial application to quash a search warrant for his residence, arguing that after excising evidence obtained in breach of his s. 8 Charter rights, the redacted Information to Obtain (ITO) lacked sufficient evidence to support the warrant.

The court reviewed the redacted ITO and found that, while the direct evidence against the accused was less overwhelming than against his co-accused, the circumstantial evidence, coded text messages, and expert opinions of the affiant provided sufficient credible and reliable evidence to establish reasonable and probable grounds.

The application to quash the search warrant was dismissed.

The accused brought a pretrial application alleging multiple breaches of his s. 8 Charter rights during a police investigation into a suspected drug stash house.

The court found that the police's use of a continuously recording, installed video camera directed at the accused's residence without a warrant violated his reasonable expectation of privacy, though video recorded during lawful physical surveillance did not.

The court upheld the police's use of a dynamic entry and the clearing of outbuildings as reasonable for officer safety.

The seizure of gun parts, a crossbow, and a Rolex watch not listed in the warrant was justified under the plain view doctrine and s. 11(8) of the CDSA, but the seizure of other jewelry was found to be unreasonable.