The accused, Vincent Ham, faced charges of possession of heroin for the purpose of trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime exceeding $5,000.
He brought an application to exclude all evidence, arguing violations of his sections 7, 8, and 9 Charter rights due to an alleged lack of reasonable and probable grounds for his arrest.
The court determined that the relevant time for assessing reasonable and probable grounds was at the time of arrest, not when the decision to arrest was initially made.
Based on extensive police surveillance (Project Union) of a suspected drug stash house and Hoang's activities, including two observed drug-related transactions on the day of the arrest, the court found that the police had both subjective and objective reasonable and probable grounds to arrest the accused.
Consequently, the application to exclude evidence was dismissed, and the accused was found guilty on both counts.
