LACK OF SEARCH WARRANT TRIAL'S FOCUS

Police Entered Pickering Home -- Man Charged With Running Grow Op

A broken door, a possible break and enter, vicious dogs and fear someone
may be hurt.

Those circumstances allowed police to enter a Pickering home without a
search warrant, a Crown attorney says.

But aside from the vicious dogs, a defence lawyer argues that those alleged
circumstances were merely an excuse so that officers could get into the
house on Highview Rd., near Whites Rd. and Finch Ave., to bust a marijuana
grow operation without getting a legal search warrant.

Yesterday at the Superior Court of Justice in Whitby, lawyers made closing
arguments at the trial of Edmund Kim.

The 30-year-old man faces charges of possessing and producing marijuana,
possession for the purpose of trafficking, and possessing the proceeds of
crime.

Kim has pleaded not guilty to all charges stemming from the April 2003
investigation.

It all started when a couple of dogs ran loose in the residential
neighbourhood, terrorizing neighbours and reportedly attacking one resident.

Police were able to scare the dogs -- a Lab and a Rottweiler -- into a home
and shut the door behind them. Officers later entered the home, testifying
that they wanted to be sure there hadn't been a break and enter and that
someone wasn't injured and trapped inside the home.

'They stumbled upon a grow op. They were not acting in bad faith.'

Crown attorney Sevag Yeghoyan

Kim's lawyer, Leora Shemesh argued that evidence of the grow op was not
obtained legitimately, with an authorized search warrant, and therefore is
not admissible in court. The search of the residence was a breach of Kim's
Charter rights, she argued.

Crown attorney Sevag Yeghoyan conceded the initial entry was conducted
without a warrant but argued one wasn't necessary because the officers had
exigent circumstances -- meaning they couldn't wait for a warrant to enter
the house because police reasonably feared someone inside may have been
seriously injured.

The fact that they had peeked in the windows, smelled marijuana and heard
loud fans had nothing to do with why they went in, Yeghoyan argued.

"There was a warrantless search. However, it was done for all the right
reasons.... They stumbled upon a grow op. They were not acting in bad
faith," Yeghoyan said.

Shemesh stated that the officer who said the door was not secure and
wouldn't shut properly never noted that in his notebook.

He also never noted that he was concerned about a potential break and
enter, she said.

Animal control officers who came to the scene testified that the window in
the front door had to be broken to gain access to the home.

Shemesh said the claim by officers that they were concerned about a break
and enter was a ruse to get inside.

Justice Barry MacDougall will deliver his verdict on April 4.