A recent Ontario court decision highlights how unlawful arrests and unjustified strip searches can lead to the exclusion of critical evidence—even in serious criminal cases involving firearms.
In a landmark ruling, the Ontario Court excluded key evidence—a loaded prohibited firearm—after determining that the Toronto Police Service violated multiple Charter rights of the accused. As a result, the accused was acquitted of all charges.
Overview of the Case:
On May 8, 2023, Toronto police officers arrested an individual based on information from two confidential sources. Officers located a loaded firearm, a digital scale with white residue, and plastic baggies. However, the court later found that the arrest was unlawful, and the subsequent searches—including strip searches—were unconstitutional.
Key Legal Issues Raised in the Case
The case focused on four critical legal questions:
- Did police have reasonable grounds to arrest the accused?
- Were the searches, especially the strip searches, in violation of the accused’s Charter rights?
- Was the accused’s right to legal counsel violated?
- Should the firearm evidence be excluded under section 24(2) of the Charter?
Charter Rights Violations Identified
Justice Brock Jones ruled that several Charter rights were breached:
1. Section 9 – Arbitrary Detention and Arrest
The court found that the police lacked reasonable and probable grounds to arrest the accused. Information from confidential informants was vague and unverified, and the officers’ observations—such as “unnatural” walking—did not justify the arrest.
2. Section 8 – Unreasonable Search and Seizure
The accused was subjected to multiple unlawful and intrusive searches:
- A public roadside strip search, where officers pulled back his jeans and underwear.
- A frisk search in the police station’s booking hall that crossed into a strip search.
- A formal strip search at 11 Division, poorly documented and inadequately justified.
These actions were found to be highly intrusive and not grounded in legal authority.
3. Section 10(b) – Right to Counsel
Police failed to allow the accused to reconsult with counsel after informing him of a strip search—a right affirmed in R. v. Thompson. This failure further violated his legal rights during custody.
Exclusion of Firearm Evidence Under Section 24(2)
Applying the three-part Grant test, the court held that the seriousness of the Charter breaches and the impact on the accused’s privacy and dignity outweighed the public interest in prosecuting the offence.
Despite the reliability and relevance of the firearm evidence, it was excluded. Without it, the Crown could not prove its case, and the accused was acquitted.
Why This Case Matters
This decision sends a clear message to law enforcement across Ontario: police powers are not unlimited. Charter rights must be respected at every stage of the criminal justice process—from arrest to detention and search procedures.
Key Takeaways:
- Unlawful arrests can undermine even strong criminal cases.
- Strip searches must be justified, private, and properly documented.
- The right to counsel must be upheld at every material stage of a criminal investigation.
- Courts will exclude critical evidence if police conduct demonstrates a serious disregard for Charter protections.
Facing Criminal Charges? Know Your Rights
If you’ve been arrested or searched by police and believe your Charter rights were violated, it’s crucial to seek legal advice immediately. The exclusion of evidence can be a powerful remedy when your rights have been infringed.
As an experienced criminal defence lawyer in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), I work tirelessly to ensure police are held accountable and your rights are protected.
📞 Contact us today for a confidential consultation.