Drug possession / trafficking

The charge followed a search executed under a warrant, with the client alleged to be in possession of a controlled substance for the purpose of trafficking. The Crown's case depended almost entirely on evidence seized during the search.

The route into a viable defence in files of this kind is almost always the warrant itself — the sufficiency of the Information to Obtain, the reliability of the informant material, and any material non-disclosure to the issuing justice.

Whether the Information to Obtain met the standard set out in Debot / Garofoli — reliable, corroborated, and compelling on its face when the informant material is properly considered.

If the ITO failed that standard, whether the resulting seizure was a s. 8 violation serious enough to trigger a Grant analysis leading to exclusion under s. 24(2).

A full Garofoli application prepared: sub-facial and, where appropriate, facial challenges to the ITO.

Detailed review of the CI-related paragraphs, applications for edited disclosure of the sealed portions, and analysis of every corroboration claim in the ITO.

In parallel, a Crown-resolution track — what the file would look like if the s. 8 argument does not succeed, and where the sentencing discussion sits.

• The Debot factors — is the source reliable, is the information credible, is it corroborated?
• Whether the affiant had material information that should have been disclosed to the issuing justice.
• The Grant framework — seriousness of the breach, impact on the accused, and society's interest in adjudication on the merits.
• Parallel proceeds-of-crime allegations, if any, and how they interact with the s. 8 analysis.

A drug file that turns on a search rarely defends itself. The work is in the ITO, the informant record, and the timeline of every step from the tip to the door.

Saggi Law Firm approaches drug matters as disclosure-first files — the Charter analysis often follows the paper.