During a trial for drug trafficking, the accused brought a Charter application alleging his s. 8 rights were breached by the search of his cell phone.
The accused sought to excise several portions of the Information to Obtain (ITO) the search warrant, arguing they were erroneous or misleading.
The court excised certain paragraphs relating to prior simple possession charges but retained references to the accused's prior proceeds of crime convictions and the officer's opinion on the logistics of drug trafficking.
The court concluded that the excised ITO still provided sufficient credible evidence to justify the search warrant.
In the alternative, the court held that the evidence would not be excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter.
