P. Wenglowski

The defendant was charged with possession of cocaine and fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking, simple possession of hydromorphone, and possession of proceeds of crime following a search warrant execution at an apartment.

The court found that the search warrant lacked sufficient grounds for issuance due to the Crown's failure to disclose the confidential informant tearaway (Appendix E) and inadequate corroborating surveillance.

Although the defendant lacked standing to challenge the apartment search, the court found his arrest and personal search unlawful under section 8 of the Charter.

The evidence seized from the defendant's person was excluded under section 24(2) of the Charter, resulting in insufficient evidence to proceed on the trafficking and proceeds of crime charges.

The simple possession charge also failed due to insufficient evidence of the defendant's knowledge and control.

The defendant was charged with driving with excess blood alcohol (over 80) and driving without a valid license.

The defendant challenged the admissibility of evidence on Charter grounds, arguing his s. 10(b) right to counsel was violated.

The court found the defendant explicitly waived his right to counsel on multiple occasions despite police efforts to facilitate contact with duty counsel.

The defendant's statements were found to be voluntary.

On the trial proper, the court found the defendant was driving within two hours of the first breath test, satisfying the statutory requirement for the presumption of identity.

The defendant was convicted on both charges.

A defendant was charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking in prescription drugs following a traffic stop and roadside search.

The court conducted a Charter application to determine whether evidence obtained during the stop should be excluded.

The defendant challenged the lawfulness of the investigative detention, the warrantless search of her purse and vehicle, and the denial of timely access to counsel.

The court found that the detention was arbitrary, lacking reasonable suspicion; the search was unlawful, as there was no valid consent and no genuine officer safety concern; and access to counsel was improperly delayed.

The court excluded all evidence obtained as a result of these Charter breaches under section 24(2), finding that admission would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

The accused, Patrick McKinnon, was charged with possession of heroin and breach of recognizance.

A Charter application was brought alleging breaches of sections 8 and 9 related to the traffic stop, detention, and questioning.

The court dismissed the Charter application, finding the initial traffic stop lawful due to a suspected Highway Traffic Act violation.

The subsequent detention of the passenger (McKinnon) was deemed lawful as it was contemporaneous with the driver's investigation and later justified by reasonable suspicion of McKinnon's involvement in alcohol consumption and marijuana possession.

The questioning and seizure of McKinnon's name were also found not to be unreasonable.

Ultimately, McKinnon was found guilty on both counts of possession of heroin and breach of recognizance.

The accused was charged with possession of unstamped manufactured tobacco contrary to section 32(1) of the Excise Tax Act, 2001.

The Crown alleged the accused knowingly transported a trailer containing 126 boxes of fine cut tobacco worth approximately $1.3 million.

The defence contended the accused believed he was hauling wooden pallets and had no knowledge of the actual contents.

The trial judge rejected the defence evidence as incredible and found the accused guilty based on circumstantial evidence, including the value of the cargo, the locked trailer without documentation, and the accused's decision to avoid a truck inspection station by taking an alternate route.