Law360 Canada ( July 21, 2022, 6:24 AM EDT) -- Appeal by the Crown from the acquittals of respondents on grounds that the trial judge erred by failing to consider reasonable inferences that could be drawn from the Information to Obtain (“ITO”) and by excluding the seized evidence. The police received information that the respondent Donaldson threatened the complainant by telling her he was going to attend at her place of employment and “shoot her in the head” and “shoot up” her house. The complainant told the police that Donaldson had firearms, and he lived at two different addresses, Brunel Court and Beverley Street. She also advised Donaldson had a roommate at the Brunel Court residence, known to her as “Ninja”. There was no dispute “Ninja” was the respondent Kalonji. On the strength of this information, the police applied for and obtained judicial authorization to search both places. Upon search of the Brunel Court residence, police officers located a handgun with an overcapacity magazine and ammunition and mail addressed to Donaldson. They also located and seized 3.27 grams of fentanyl and $7,960 in a safe in the master bedroom. Donaldson and Kalonji were charged jointly with various offences, including possession of a loaded prohibited firearm, among others. The respondents challenged the Brunel Court warrant. The trial judge quashed the warrant, concluding that the ITO did not disclose reasonable and probable grounds to believe that firearms would be in that location. The evidence was excluded, and both respondents were found not guilty....