Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Ont. C.A. considered whether a mistaken-identity arrest was lawful, and whether drugs and a gun found on the appellant should be excluded under s. 24(2).
2026 BCSC 720
Source excerpt
First warrant was invalid on its face because its authorized night-time window had expired before the ITO was received and the warrant issued; however the officer's partial opening of the garage door was justified by exigent circumstances (risk to officer/public given flight of a suspect known for weapons and contextual indicators), and after excising tainted material the remaining information in the second ITO was sufficient such that the issuing justice could have properly issued the second warrant; seized items therefore remain in court custody under s.490 pending the separate forfeiture h…
Source excerpt
On the totality of the circumstances the Information to Obtain provided reasonable and probable grounds to search 13 Kingsmere Court for firearms and ammunition; the night/no-knock and dynamic-entry authorization was justified by the risk posed by an armed suspect; the manner of execution (large tactical presence and limited use of CS gas) was reasonable and did not breach s.8; the post-search custody conditions did not meet the threshold for s.7 or s.12 breaches and did not warrant a stay of proceedings.
Source excerpt
The trial judge correctly applied the governing law, made credible factual findings entitled to deference, and the Crown proved on a balance of probabilities that exigent circumstances justified the warrantless entry to locate and prevent imminent harm to the missing person; similarly, the record did not establish police/Crown conduct that irreparably prejudiced the accused's fair trial rights or otherwise warranted a stay under the residual category, so the appeal is dismissed and the conviction stands.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal upheld dismissal of a civil action challenging wiretap-based charges, holding the intercepts were admissible and the police had reasonable grounds.
Voir dire on strip searches and counsel rights: the court found s. 8 and s. 10(b) Charter breaches, and reserved the s. 24(2) exclusion issue.
The court excluded evidence seized from Mr. Cancela’s residence under s. 24(2), finding the warrant affidavit materially omitted and overstated key facts.
The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed Luan Ngo’s conviction appeal, holding the no-knock entry was justified under Cornell and that no s. 8 breach was shown.
The Court of Appeal allowed the Crown’s appeal, set aside an acquittal, and ordered a new trial after finding the warrant review judge missed reasonable inferences from the ITO.
Explore more
