WARNING
The court hearing this matter directs that the following notice be attached to the file:
A non-publication and non-broadcast order in this proceeding has been issued under subsection 486.4(1) of the Criminal Code. This subsection and subsection 486.6(1) of the Criminal Code, which is concerned with the consequence of failure to comply with an order made under subsection 486.4(1), read as follows:
486.4 Order restricting publication — sexual offences. — (1) Subject to subsection (2), the presiding judge or justice may make an order directing that any information that could identify the victim or a witness shall not be published in any document or broadcast or transmitted in any way, in proceedings in respect of
( a ) any of the following offences:
(i) an offence under section 151, 152, 153, 153.1, 155, 160, 162, 162.1, 163.1, 170, 171, 171.1, 172, 172.1, 172.2, 173, 213, 271, 272, 273, 279.01, 279.011, 279.02, 279.03, 280, 281, 286.1, 286.2, 286.3, 346 or 347, or
(ii) any offence under this Act, as it read from time to time before the day on which this subparagraph comes into force, if the conduct alleged would be an offence referred to in subparagraph (i) if it occurred on or after that day; or
( b ) two or more offences being dealt with in the same proceeding, at least one of which is an offence referred to in paragraph (a) .
(2) MANDATORY ORDER ON APPLICATION — In proceedings in respect of the offences referred to in paragraph (1)( a ) or ( b ), the presiding judge or justice shall
( a ) at the first reasonable opportunity, inform any witness under the age of eighteen years and the victim of the right to make an application for the order; and
( b ) on application made by the victim, the prosecutor or any such witness, make the order.
486.6 OFFENCE — (1) Every person who fails to comply with an order made under any of subsections 486.4(1) to (3) or subsection 486.5(1) or (2) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Ontario Court of Justice
Date: October 1, 2024 Court File No.: 4810-998-22-70001577
Between:
Her Majesty The Queen
— And —
Daylo Robinson Dalton Wilson
Before: Justice Hafeez S. Amarshi Written reasons for judgment released on October 1, 2024
Counsel: M. Gharabaway, counsel for the Crown T. Okada-Phillips, counsel for Daylo Robinson S. Proudlove, counsel for Dalton Wilson
H.S. Amarshi J.:
Ruling on Section 8 Charter Application: Search Warrant Sufficiency
A. Introduction
[1] Daylo Robinson and Dalton Wilson are seeking exclusion as evidence a firearm and illicit drugs that were seized when police executed a search warrant at Mr. Wilson’s residence in Port Perry, Ontario. Mr. Robinson was alleged to have also been living in the unit with his girlfriend Evelyn Negus, albeit temporarily. The applicants submit their rights under section 8 of the Charter were violated. That the information to obtain (ITO) did not establish a basis upon which the authorizing justice could have been satisfied that there were reasonable grounds to support the issuance of a search warrant. Specifically, a telewarrant was issued without the requisite grounds to believe: (i) that a firearm would be located inside the residence; and (ii) that Dalton Wilson had engaged in procuring the complainant, M.D., and that evidence of such, including the additional offences being investigated involving Mr. Robinson, would be found at the Port Perry residence or in electronic devices located in the unit. [^1]
Background of the investigation
[2] On February 10, 2002, police executed a search warrant at 185 Queen St, Unit 2, Port Perry. Four people were located inside the unit. [^2] In a satchel on a bed police located a loaded firearm. Also located on the bed was 35.6 grams of crystal methamphetamine, 51.07 grams of powder cocaine and 2.19 grams of fentanyl.
[3] Earlier that day a telewarrant had been granted to search the Queen St. apartment and a Volkswagen Jetta belonging to Evelyn Negus’ father. No evidence was recovered from the vehicle. A Feeney warrant was also authorized at the same time for the arrest of Daylo Robinson and Dalton Wilson. [^3]
[4] At the time of the alleged offences, Mr. Robinson was bound by a recognizance from Nova Scotia that included a house arrest condition. The release was related to firearms related charges from Dartmouth. On February 10, 2023, prior to the search of the Queen St. apartment, a warrant of arrest was issued by a Justice of the Peace in Nova Scotia.
[5] By way of background of the investigation, M.D. contacted police on February 3, 2022, telling them that Mr. Robinson had moved to an apartment two or three units from her apartment. The unit belonged to Dalton Wilson. She alleged that she was sexually assaulted and trafficked by Daylo Robinson in March 2018 when she was 17 years old. She further alleged that Mr. Wilson visited her and said he would pay her $15,000 if she dropped those charges against Mr. Robinson. Further, that Mr. Wilson asked her to provide sexual services for money from a hotel and that Evelyn Negus would watch her young child.
Standing
[6] In an earlier decision, R. v. Robinson, 2024 ONCJ 477, I concluded that Daylo Robinson lacked standing to challenge the search warrant, I will address the arguments related to the sufficiency of the ITO advanced by Mr. Okada-Philips, counsel for Mr. Robinson. [^4] Of note, Mr. Proudlove, counsel for Mr. Wilson, adopted fully the submissions of the co-accused as applicable to his client.
B. Applicable Principles
Search warrant review
[7] A search warrant that has been judicially authorized is presumed to be valid. The onus of establishing invalidly rests upon the challenging party. [^5]
[8] The onus is not upon the applicant to merely show that there were defects in the ITO; the applicant must establish the breach of section 8 on a balance of probabilities. This can be done only by showing that it is likely that the search warrant would not have issued based upon the content of the ITO. [^6]
[9] The standard of persuasion for the issuance of a warrant is reasonable grounds to believe. This standard is one of credibly-based probability and requires proof of reasonable probability or reasonable belief. It requires more than an experienced-based "hunch" or reasonable suspicion. [^7] The determination of this standard does not involve a mathematical assessment of facts and circumstances but rather a common-sense, non-technical approach - it is a qualitative standard upon which reasonable people can differ in some cases. [^8]
[10] A justice issuing a search warrant must have reasonable grounds to believe that an offence has been committed. The material in support of the warrant must raise a reasonable probability of discovering evidence of the crime at the place of the proposed search. [^9]
[11] It is well-established that the issue for a reviewing court is not whether it would have issued the search warrant but whether there was sufficient credible and reliable evidence to permit the issuing justice to find reasonable and probable grounds for the warrant. [^10]
[12] The affiant has an obligation to make full, fair and frank disclosure of all material facts, favourable or not. [^11] The affiant must not conceal or omit material facts or exaggerate the information on which he or she relies. [^12]
[13] The central consideration on the review of a search warrant therefore is whether on the record as it existed before the issuing justice and as amplified at the hearing, with any offending portions of the ITO excised, there remains a sufficient basis upon which the warrant could be issued. [^13]
C. Analysis – the Sufficiency of the ITO
Background - structure and contents of the ITO
[14] The telewarrant dated February 10, 2022, seeks to search two locations – a 2015 Volkswagen Jetta with a Nova Scotia licence plate and at 185 Queen St, Port Perry, Unit 2.
[15] It lists the following items to be searched for under Appendix A of the ITO: firearm, ammunition, firearm accessories (magazine), electronic devices including cellular phones, tablets and computers, identification. [^14]
[16] Under Appendix B it is alleged that Daylo Robinson has committed the following offences: (i) obstruct justice, specifically that he attempted to dissuade M.D. by bribes from giving evidence in judicial proceedings (ii) failing to comply with a recognizance, specifically while being bound by a court order failed to comply with a condition that he remain in the province of Nova Scotia.
[17] It is further alleged under Appendix B that Dalton Wilson (i) intentionally attempted to dissuade M.D. by bribes from giving evidence in judicial proceedings (ii) procuring M.D. to offer or provide sexual services for consideration.
[18] Appendix C comprises the bulk of the affidavit and contains an introduction of the affiant – Detective Constable Justin Zeppieri. The officer is a member of the Human Trafficking Enforcement Team of the Toronto Police Service. The section includes opinions and personal observations of the officer based on his experience working with the human trafficking team. Further, the appendix includes in a general sense background information on the nature of human trafficking investigations.
[19] In terms of the structure of the ITO, the affidavit includes an overview of the investigation and how it commenced, the involved officers, investigatory steps taken by the affiant in the preparation of the ITO, and surveillance efforts by the Human Trafficking Enforcement Team.
[20] Of note, the ITO contains neither paragraphs nor page numbers. This is a poor practice. I have manually inserted page numbers for the purposes of organization and reference.
[21] The ITO described certain investigatory steps taken by the affiant in the preparation of the search warrant. On February 3, 2022, DC Zeppieri reviewed an occurrence report from May 2018, where it is alleged Daylo Robinson, and two other individuals (not Dalton Wilson) procured M.D. into providing sexual services for consideration. That Mr. Robinson used physical force and that she turned over $7000 to him. That the applicant showed her a handgun at a party and told her it was loaded. M.D. left the party and called police. Mr. Robinson was arrested on May 24, 2018, for human trafficking related offences. Those matters at the time the ITO was drafted were still before the courts.
[22] The affiant outlined how this investigation commenced. That the human trafficking team was contacted by M.D. on February 3. That “Dalton” attended at her apartment in Port Perry. That they smoked marijuana together. That Dalton showed her an Instagram photo of Mr. Robinson. He told her that the applicant who was accompanied by his girlfriend had taken over his apartment and that he was concerned for his safety.
[23] M.D. provided a more fulsome statement on February 9, repeating these details. In addition, she advised Dalton asked her if she wanted to work in a hotel to make money and that “Evelyn” would watch her young child. She concluded that the offer was to provide sexual services. She further told police during her statement that Dalton told her if she dropped the charges against Mr. Robinson, that she would be paid $15,000. She thought it was “weird” that Dalton had contacted her because they do not normally speak. She felt like she was being watched by a female sitting in a grey Volkswagen.
[24] The affiant was able to determine that Dalton referred to “Dalton Wilson” and through a database check determined he lived at 2-185 Queen St. in Port Perry. He further learned that another individual – Healy Crawford had contacted the Durham Regional Police Service, to report that Mr. Wilson was in possession of a firearm. That she was concerned for her safety. The complainant provided names of individuals in the unit including a male known as “Preem” or “Kane” with a tattooed face. Preem according to the affiant is an alias for Daylo Robinson, who is known to have his face tattooed.
[25] At the time of the database checks, Durham police were still investigating Ms. Crawford’s complaint.
[26] DC Zeppeieri further reviewed a January 22, 2002, report from the Halifax Police Service, where the complainant, Michael Saulnier, contacted police to say that he had been threatened via messages on Facebook. [^15] One of the messages contained a photograph of a revolver with six grounds. The profile of the sender was Dalton Wilson.
[27] In a section entitled “Background of Involved Persons,” the ITO includes the following information derived from additional database checks. That Daylo Robinson had five sets of outstanding charges with offence dates ranging from March 2018 to June 2021. That many of the charges are related to human trafficking. One of the offences is firearm related. That as part of his release, he is bound by a house arrest condition and that he remain in the province of Nova Scotia. Further he is to have no contact with M.D. He is prohibited from possessing a firearm for life.
[28] In addition, the affidavit includes his criminal record. Entries include unauthorized possession of a firearm, aggravated assault, break and enter and multiple breaches of court orders. The entries are from multiple jurisdictions in Ontario and Nova Scotia.
[29] The ITO included photos of Daylo Robinson. Facial tattoos are evident.
[30] Dalton Wilson’s criminal record included entries for fail to comply undertaking, robbery, theft under and mischief over. He is prohibited from possessing a firearm. Two photos of Mr. Wilson are contained in the ITO.
[31] Evelyn Negus is also included as an involved person. She has no criminal record, nor does she have any outstanding charges. She is associated to a Volkswagen observed by police to be parked outside 185 Queen Street. The vehicle is registered to her father.
[32] Background information related to M.D. is contained in the ITO. It is largely redacted. She is known to police. She does not have a criminal record.
[33] Under a section entitled “Surveillance,” the affiant outlines efforts made by the human trafficking team to surveil the individuals identified as involved persons.
[34] On February 3, 2022, an officer observed a grey Volkswagen Jetta at the rear of 185 Queen Street. It contained a Nova Scotia licence plate. The affiant believed this observation corroborated information provided to police by M.D.. On February 7, Evelyn Negus and Dalton Wilson were identified in the vehicle.
[35] The ITO details efforts made by Detective Constable Gregory Vandekerckhove to obtain additional information about the applicants through open-source checks. On February 9, he accessed the profile page of an individual he believed to be Daylo Robinson. He compared pictures from his “mugshot” to photos on his profile page. In a comment on one of Mr. Robinson’s photos, his nickname is revealed as “Preme.” [^16] The officer further concluded there was a connection between Evelyn Negus and Daylo Robinson based on his review of the applicant’s Facebook profile.
[36] The affiant concluded the information derived from the open-source check was significant. That Preme is linked to a Durham police occurrence report from January 22, 2022, of a male who went by the same alias inside 185 Queen Street and that he has a firearm. The description from that report matches Mr. Robinson’s physical attributes.
[37] At page 30 of the ITO, images of 185 Queen Street are imbedded in the affidavit as well as the location of Mr. Wilson’s unit in the building. The building has two floors, with commercial units on the ground floor and residential units on the second floor. On the page that follows is an image of a grey Volkswagen Jetta that police seek to search and further information linking the vehicle to Evelyn Negus.
[38] At page 32, DC Zeppeieri includes a summary of his grounds to believe that the items listed in Appendix A will be found in the places to be searched, specifically in the Volkswagen Jetta and Port Perry unit. These include references to firearm related reports from Durham and Halifax. Further, based on information provided by M.D. that Mr. Robinson was on the run from Halifax and needed a place to stay.
[39] The ITO further established that Daylo Robinson was on a release for offences dated June 18, 2021, for disobeying a court order and failing to comply with a release order. That as part of his release he was subject to a house arrest condition and that he was to have no contact with M.D..
[40] The remainder of the ITO included justifications for a telewarrant and a request for a night entry by police.
[41] Included in the ITO package is a Feeney warrant. It includes the same information as contained in the search warrant affidavit. It details a warrant in the first instance dated February 10, 2022, and authorized by a Justice of the Peace in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. The warrant of arrest states that Daylo Robinson has seven outstanding firearm offences in Nova Scotia. The offence date is Dec 25, 2021.
Connection between a firearm and the place to be searched
[42] The applicants argued despite the search warrant particularizing a firearm, there were no grounds to believe a firearm would be present in the residence. Further, the search warrant for 185 Queen St. contains no grounds to believe that a firearm would afford evidence of the offences under Appendix B, which are listed as obstruct justice, procuring, and fail to comply with a recognizance, specifically a condition that Daylo Robinson is to reside in Nova Scotia.
[43] I did not accept the applicant’s argument. When the ITO is reviewed as a whole, and the evidence that was before the issuing justice is assessed, there was a basis for the issuing justice to conclude that the items sought, including a firearm would be in Mr. Wilson’s residence.
[44] I based this conclusion on the following:
(i) Healy Crawford notified Durham police that Dalton Wilson was in possession of a firearm. That he was threatening people. She was sufficiently scared that she called police. She further advised police of multiple people in Mr. Wilson’s unit including Daylo Robinson. She provided his street name “Preme.” [^17] A January 2022, occurrence report described Preme as being inside the 185 Queen St. residence in Port Perry and having a firearm.
(ii) There is a second police report linking Dalton Wilson to a firearm. The occurrence is timely. On January 23, 2022, 18 days prior to the search warrant execution, Michael Salunier contacted Halifax police to notify them that he was being threatened by a person he believed to be Mr. Wilson via Facebook messenger. Of significance, he received a message with a photo of a revolver and six rounds, enhancing the seriousness and credibility of the threat.
(iii) Daylo Robinson is also linked to a firearm and sufficiently connected to the 185 Queen St. address. [^18] Further, Halifax police requested a Canada wide warrant arrest for the applicant and a warrant in the first was authorized by a Justice of the Peace in Dartmouth. This warrant was in relation to a firearms investigation. The applicant was charged with careless use of a firearm, possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose, possession of a prohibited weapon, restricted weapon or prohibited device, possession of a firearm knowing possession is unauthorized, occupant of a motor vehicle with a firearm, prohibited weapon or restricted weapon and two counts of possession of a firearm. The offences were alleged to have occurred recently.
(iv) Mr. Robinson has outstanding charges where M.D. is the complainant. M.D. alleges that the applicant showed her a loaded Glock at a party. [^19]
[45] I also considered the opinion of the affiant. At page 23 of the ITO, the affiant explains:
Traffickers also use weapons, specifically firearms to create an atmosphere of fear which will illicit compliance from the victims. During my investigation into this matter, I have read police reports, occurrences, statements made by civilian witnesses, statements and notations made by primary response officers and enquiries made through police computer data banks.
[46] I did not determine this to be a conclusory and unsupportable statement. Indeed, it is alleged that Mr. Robinson used a firearm in the past to intimidate M.D. into providing sexual services for consideration. That aside, as a general statement about human traffickers it has some value. [^20] In R. v. Prosser, 2016 ONCA 467, the ITO included opinion evidence from the affiant regarding practices of drug traffickers in relation to the storage of drugs and related evidence. The Court of Appeal concluded the issuing justice and reviewing judge were both entitled to rely upon this evidence.
[47] The defence seeks to draw an analogy between this case and the facts in R. v. Rocha, 2012 ONCA 707. In Rocha, the Court of Appeal reviewed the validity of a search warrant that authorized the search of two different locations. The confidential informant gave compelling information about drug dealing at a restaurant, while the tip about the presence of drugs at the home was deemed to be a bare assertion. The court found that the ITO in that case failed to reveal any basis apart from the informer’s bald conclusion to support the search of the home.
[48] The difficulty with the analogy is that the ITO in Rocha was based entirely on informant information and any grounds related to the search of the suspect’s residence had been edited out to protect the identity of the informant(s). The evidentiary basis to support a search of the home was sparse. That is not the case here.
[49] In R. v. El-Azarak, 2018 ONSC 4450, Justice De Sa at para. 36, assessed the impact of Rocha on the state of the law explaining, “To suggest, however, that Rocha stands for the general proposition that an affiant cannot rely on common sense inferences in relation to a target’s home would be incorrect in my view.”
[50] In this case there were common sense inferences that supported a reasonable belief that a firearm would be found in the Port Perry residence. In addition to information from an occurrence report that Mr. Robinson had a firearm in the unit, there were timely reports from police in two different jurisdictions that Mr. Wilson was in possession of a firearm. Of note, the complaints came from three named individuals whose identities were known to police. [^21] The issuing justice was aware of their motivations – the complainants were scared and sought police assistance. This is not a case where information had been provided by confidential informants, where motivations for providing information is a live issue in assessing the reliability of the tip information.
[51] Further, this is not a circumstance of mere or passing possession of a contraband. The Durham and Halifax occurrence reports suggest recent possession and threats involving a firearm either implied or explicit. They support a search of Mr. Wilson’s residence.
[52] The occurrence report compiled by the Halifax Police Service is particularly compelling, in that an individual purported to be Dalton Wilson, sent a photo to the complainant of a revolver and ammunition.
[53] I have also considered R. v. Herta, 2018 ONCA 927, which the defence also relied upon. In Herta, the court held the informant tip that the accused had a firearm and would keep it on him at all times was conclusory in nature. The confidential informant never saw the suspect at the address in question with the firearm. Accepting such a bald conclusory tip risked turning the accused into “walking, ready-made grounds for belief.” [^22]
[54] Herta is distinguishable. The Court of Appeal concluded that the ITO was drafted in such a way as to have the potential of leaving the issuing justice with the impression that the target lived at the residence which was incorrect. There is no such misrepresentation in this case. The court further observed the police could have applied for a s. 529 warrant to enter the location and the defendant would have been liable to a search incident to arrest. Instead, the police sought a warrant to search the home. I note that a Feeney warrant for the applicants was authorized in this case.
[55] Of significance, the court in Herta observed that if the police search had been the accused’s residence it might have given rise to a reasonable inference that the accused would hide his rifle in his own home. [^23]
[56] Mr. Okada-Philips also sought to draw parallels between this case and R. v. Reid, 2020 ONCJ 35. In Reid, Justice North found the ITO did not establish a reasonable nexus between the accused’s possession of illicit substances and the apartment unit searched and excluded a firearm and drugs from the residence. The court was critical of certain omissions in the ITO that undercut the probability that evidence would be found in the apartment including the timing and location of surveillance observations by police. Crucially there was no clear connection between the accused and the address that was searched, and police overstated the surveillance connecting the target to this address. That is not the case here and there were ample grounds to support the belief that Mr. Wilson was living at the Port Perry address, including records check and the statement to police from M.D. who lived a few doors away from the defendant.
Appendix B omission
[57] The defence points out there is no mention of a firearm in Appendix B, which outlines the offences alleged to have been committed by the applicants and the basis for searching the Port Perry premises.
[58] I have concluded that this was an oversight by the affiant. [^24] The ITO makes seven separate references to firearms. A firearm is referenced in Appendix A which lists items to search for. It is clear that the request for a search warrant was the culmination of a parallel human trafficking and firearms investigation by police.
Evidence to support a search of electronic devices
[59] The applicants argued there were no grounds to search inside the apartment unit including electronic devices for the offences enumerated in Appendix B, specifically obstruct justice, failing to comply with a recognizance and procuring. That M.D.’s statement to police where she said Mr. Wilson asked her to work in a hotel and make money does not rise to the level of credibly based probability that the applicant procured M.D.. Certainly insufficient, Mr. Okada-Philips argued, that the police sought to “scour” all of the electronics found in the apartment. That there was a marginal basis to believe any evidence would be found on them.
[60] I have concluded that the issuing justice could have been satisfied that there were reasonable grounds to believe that Mr. Wilson was engaged in procuring M.D. and that both applicants were working together to obstruct the complainant from testifying against Mr. Robinson. Further a search of the unit and electronic devices would reveal evidence of these offences.
[61] Parliament intentionally defined the offence of procuring broadly. Section 286.3(2) of the Criminal Code sets out alternative modes of committing the offence. The Crown may establish the offence by proof of conduct which would satisfy either of the two modes, specifically, the accused: “Procures a person to offer or provide sexual services for consideration”; or “recruits, holds, conceals, or harbours a person who offers or provides sexual services for consideration, or exercises control, direction or influence over the movements of that person.” It is not an essential element of the offence that the victim actually provides sexual services for consideration.
[62] Dalton Wilson’s attempt, according to M.D., to have her provide sexual services in a hotel satisfies this definition. Indeed, there is some substance to this plan, with Mr. Wilson telling the complainant that Evelyn Negus would watch her child while she was working.
[63] Further, Mr. Wilson told M.D. that Mr. Robinson would give her $15,000 to “drop the charges.” The ITO established that Daylo Robison was facing multiple human trafficking related charges. M.D. was the complainant. Further, he was bound by a recognizance to have no contact with her. As noted, the reasonable and probable grounds standard is one of reasonable probability or credibly-based probability. While more than a reasonable suspicion must be established, this standard does not require a prima facie case. [^25] Applying this standard I am satisfied the applicants were sufficiently connected to the offences being investigated by the Human Trafficking Enforcement Team.
[64] I accept it is unlikely evidence of obstructing justice and breach of a court order would have been obtained from electronic devices in the unit, but I am satisfied there is a reasonable probability of discovering evidence of procuring through a search of cell phones. It has been readily established that the internet and message-based applications facilitate human trafficking.
D. Conclusion
[65] I find the search warrant was lawfully obtained. The application to set aside the search warrant and exclude evidence seized from 2-185 Queen St. Port Perry is dismissed. As a result of this conclusion, it is unnecessary to undertake a section 24(2) Charter analysis.
[66] I want to thank both counsel for their helpful submissions and the thoughtful manner in which this litigation was conducted.
H.S. Amarshi J.
[^1]: In addition to possession of a firearm, Daylo Wilson was being investigated for obstructing justice and failing to comply with a recognizance from Nova Scotia. Dalton Wilson was being investigated for possession of a firearm, procuring and obstructing justice. [^2]: In addition to the applicants, Evelyn Negus and Mercedeze Watson were in the unit. The charges against Ms. Negus and Ms. Watson were eventually stayed after they provided statutory declarations stating they neither had knowledge nor control of the contraband in the apartment. [^3]: The defence concedes there were grounds to arrest Daylo Robin and Dalton Wilson. [^4]: Mr. Okada-Phillips only represented Dayo Robinson for the s. 8 challenge. [^5]: R. v. Sadikov, 2014 ONCA 72. [^6]: R. v. Dionisi, 2012 ABCA 20. [^7]: R. v. Debartolo, 2018 ONSC 916, at para. 32 (ii). [^8]: See R. v. Amare, 2014 ONSC 4119 at para. 83, where Hill J. provides a comprehensive overview of the reasonable and probable grounds standard. [^9]: R. v. Brown, 2021 ONCA 119. [^10]: In R. v. Garofoli, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1421 (), Sopinka J. summarized the standard of review, at p. 1452: The reviewing judge does not substitute his or her view for that of the authorizing judge. If, based on the record which was before the authorizing judge as amplified on the review, the reviewing judge concludes that the authorizing judge could have granted the authorization, then he or she should not interfere. In this process, the existence of fraud, non-disclosure, misleading evidence and new evidence are all relevant, but, rather than being a prerequisite to review, their sole impact is to determine whether there continues to be any basis for the decision of the authorizing judge. [^11]: R. v. Araujo, 2000 SCC 65, at paras. 46-47. [^12]: R. v. Morelli, 2010 SCC 8, at para. 102. [^13]: R. v. Nguyen, 2011 ONCA 465, at para. 57. [^14]: Items to be searched for within the electronic devices including saved advertisements or receipts for websites that sell sexual services are listed under Appendix A. [^15]: The complainant’s name is spelt two different ways in the ITO. Likely an error. [^16]: The alias is spelt two different ways in the ITO. Likely an error. [^17]: The alias or nickname is referenced on a second occasion on Daylo Robinson’s Facebook page which corroborates the alias as belonging to Robinson. Her description of the applicant having face tattoos matches his known photos and are included in the ITO. The information is timely. [^18]: Both Healy Crawford and M.D. put him at that address. M.D. lived a few doors down from Mr. Wilson’s unit. She was moved by police for her safety. [^19]: The outstanding charges are dated - May 2018, and standing alone would be insufficient to support the issuance of the ITO to search for a firearm, however when considered with the other timely occurrences contribute to the grounds. The May 2018 occurrence is relevant to the procuring and obstruct justice investigation and provide context for Dalton Wilson’s meeting with M.D. where she says the applicant tried to dissuade her from testifying against Mr. Robinson. [^20]: Officer training and experience may play a role in establishing the existence of reasonable and probable grounds. However, courts are not required to uncritically accept or defer to a police officer’s conclusion that is grounded in his or her experience and training - R. v. MacKenzie, [2013] 3 SCR 250 (2013 SCC 50), at paras. 62-64. [^21]: M.D. in her statement to the human trafficking team. Healy Crawford’s complaint with Durham police; Michael Saulnier’s complaint with Halifax police. [^22]: At para. 51. [^23]: Ibid, at para. 54 [^24]: There was no evidence tendered on this issue. This conclusion is based on a reading of the whole ITO. [^25]: R. v. Debot, [1989] 2 SCR 1140 (). See also R. v. Beauchamp, 2015 ONCA 260 at para. 92 - In the context of an application for a search warrant, there is no requirement to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, or even on a balance of probabilities, that an offence has been committed and that evidence of that offence would be found at the time and place of the search.