R. v. Enns

R. v. Enns

The warrant applications were not supported by sufficient credible and reliable grounds because they relied predominantly on uncorroborated open‑source internet material of unknown provenance and currency, included misleading/irrelevant prejudicial information and omitted material facts; therefore the searches breached s.8 and, applying Grant balancing (serious police carelessness, moderate privacy impact, significant but not overriding public interest), admission of the seized evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute and must be excluded under s.24(2).

Citation
2021 NSPC 45
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Christopher Enns; Accused Corporate: 3247317 Nova Scotia Ltd.
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal (cannabis Act and Criminal Code) / Pre Trial S.8 Warrant Validity Review and S.24(2) Exclusion Application
Outcome
Application granted: warrants declared invalid, searches found to breach s.8 and evidence excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter.
Legal Topics
Section 8 Charter, Section 24(2) Charter, Search Warrant/ito Sufficiency, Internet/open‑source Evidence Reliability, Material Non‑disclosure and Excision, Exclusion of Evidence
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Search and Seizure Cannabis Regulatory Law Section 8 Charter Section 24(2) Charter Search Warrant/ito Sufficiency Internet/open‑source Evidence Reliability +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Christopher Enns

Accused

3247317 Nova Scotia Ltd.

Accused Corporate

Procedural Posture

Criminal (cannabis Act and Criminal Code) / Pre Trial S.8 Warrant Validity Review and S.24(2) Exclusion Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Information to Obtain (ITO) provided reasonable and probable grounds to issue s.87 Cannabis Act warrants
  2. 2 Whether internet/open‑source information relied upon was credible and sufficiently corroborated
  3. 3 Whether material inaccuracies or omissions rendered the ITO misleading (duty of full and frank disclosure)

Ratio Decidendi

The warrant applications were not supported by sufficient credible and reliable grounds because they relied predominantly on uncorroborated open‑source internet material of unknown provenance and currency, included misleading/irrelevant prejudicial information and omitted material facts; therefore the searches breached s.8 and, applying Grant balancing (serious police carelessness, moderate privacy impact, significant but not overriding public interest), admission of the seized evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute and must be excluded under s.24(2).

Court Disposition

Application granted: warrants declared invalid, searches found to breach s.8 and evidence excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter.

Orders

  • Search warrants issued August 1, 2019 for 5106 Hwy 7 Porters Lake and 2320 Gottingen Street Halifax are invalid.
  • All evidence seized pursuant to those searches is excluded under s.24(2) of the Charter.