Law360 Canada ( October 7, 2026, 9:41 AM EDT) -- Appeal by appellant from convictions for accessing, making available and making child sexual abuse and exploitation material (CSAEM). Police obtained a warrant for the appellant’s home after receiving a tip that an IP address uploaded a CSAEM image. During the six-hour search, police detained and questioned the appellant without properly informing him of his right to counsel and seized electronic devices containing CSAEM. Following his arrest, police routinely strip searched him without considering his individual circumstances. The appellant sought exclusion of his statements and the computer evidence under s. 24(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter). The trial judge found breaches of ss. 8 and 10(b) of the Charter, excluded the statements, but admitted the computer evidence. Her supplementary reasons considered only the s. 10(b) Charter breach because the strip search had no connection to the discovery of the evidence. The appellant appealed his conviction on the grounds that the trial judge erred in not excluding the computer evidence. The appellant submitted that the supplementary reasons were an after-the-fact justification or, alternatively, that the trial judge erred by omitting the strip search from the Grant analysis and overemphasizing discoverability. He also alleged for the first time on appeal that police breached s. 8 of the Charter by using the IP address without a warrant....