First party disclosure application in drug case. Accused’s vehicle was stopped, and a police service dog (PSD) and handler were deployed to search around the exterior for odours. Defence sought training materials provided to the handler, deployment records for the PSD, and occurrence reports for any instances where the PSD was deployed and nothing was found.

Held: Not first party disclosure.

Not in the possession of the Crown and not fruits of the investigation. Therefore, analysis focused on whether they were “obviously relevant” here. The Court noted that the handler’s “reasoning [on grounds] is transparent for objective and meaningful review at trial”, and the training materials would not be obviously relevant in assessing the same. Further, substantial data about the PSD had already been produced, and it was not clear that the additional deployment records and occurrence reports being sought would contain anything obviously relevant to assessing the PSD’s accuracy, or the handler’s reliance on and interpretations of the PSD’s indications.

I. McKay – Defence Counsel