This decision addresses the admissibility of blood and medical records seized from the accused, who was charged with impaired driving and driving with an unlawful blood alcohol concentration (BAC) following a single-vehicle accident.
The accused challenged the search warrant and production order, arguing a lack of reasonable and probable grounds in the Information to Obtain (ITO) and that the ITO was misleading.
The court found that the ITO was misleading regarding the presence of a whisky bottle (implying it was open when its state was unknown) and that a witness's bald suspicion of impairment lacked sufficient factual basis.
Excising the misleading information, the court concluded that the remaining facts did not establish reasonable and probable grounds, rendering the seizure warrantless and a violation of section 8 of the Charter.
Applying the section 24(2) Grant factors, the court determined that admitting the evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute, primarily due to the serious impact on the accused's Charter rights, despite the officer's conduct not being particularly egregious.
The evidence was therefore excluded.