The accused brought a pre-trial application challenging the validity of a search warrant executed at his residence, which resulted in the seizure of cocaine.
The accused argued that the Information to Obtain (ITO) contained material non-disclosure and misrepresentations, specifically regarding a 'hand-to-hand transaction' and a non-existent criminal record.
The court found that the ITO was deficient and that, after excising the misleading information, there were insufficient grounds to issue the warrant.
The court concluded that the search violated s. 8 of the Charter and excluded the evidence under s. 24(2), finding that its admission would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
