Law360 Canada ( March 6, 2025, 9:16 AM EST) -- Appeal by Alipourobati from his convictions for offences related to unlawful possession of a firearm discovered during a traffic stop. The convictions stemmed from a traffic stop conducted by Police Constable ("PC") Griffen in Rural Bradford West Gwillimbury, Ontario. During the stop, PC Griffen observed a white Mercedes Benz driving below the speed limit and suspected the driver might be impaired. Upon stopping the vehicle, PC Griffen smelled marijuana, saw marijuana flakes, and noticed an open box of beer. Alipourobati, who was driving, had no driver's documents and was found to be a suspended G1 driver. A subsequent oral fluid test indicated he was over the legal limit for THC. During a search of the car, a loaded handgun was found. Alipourobati appealed his conviction, arguing that the traffic stop was a result of racial profiling, thus lacking a lawful basis for the search. He claimed violations of his rights under sections 7, 8, 9, 10(a), and 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ("Charter"). The trial judge found modest breaches of sections 7 and 10(b) but admitted the firearm evidence under section 24(2) of the Charter, concluding that the evidence should not be excluded. Alipourobati contended that the trial judge erred in dismissing the racial profiling claim and in not excluding the evidence due to the alleged Charter breaches. The trial judge accepted PC Griffen's testimony that he did not know the racial identity of the car's occupants when he decided to stop the vehicle. The judge found that the stop was based on the vehicle's driving pattern, which suggested possible impairment, and not on racial profiling. The trial judge also determined that the subsequent investigative steps were justified by the information obtained during the stop....