The police received confidential information from 3 sources that one of the accused was in possession of crack cocaine. The accused's vehicle was pulled over and the accused driver and the passenger were arrested and drugs were seized. The two co-accused were jointly charged with possessing Crack Cocaine for the purpose of trafficking contrary to s. 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. The driver co-accused was also charged with unlawfully possessing Temazepam contrary to s. 4(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and two counts of breach of probation contrary to s. 733.1 of the Criminal Code. At issue was whether there were reasonable grounds to believe the accused had or were about to commit an indictable offence to justify their arrest and subsequent search without a warrant; and if Charter rights were breached whether the crack cocaine seized should be excluded from evidence pursuant to s. 24(2) of the Charter; and, if one or both of the accused were found in unlawful possession of a controlled drug whether the possession was for the purposes of trafficking. There was no evidence that the police attempted to or obtained a warrant for the arrest of either accused or for the search of the vehicle in question.HELD: The driver was found guilty of possession of crack cocaine for the purpose of trafficking; the Court was unable to conclude that the passenger was in possession of the drugs beyond a reasonable doubt. 1) The Court was satisfied that the information provided by the confidential informants was compelling and credible and, given there were three separate informants, information from one corroborated the others which gave the police reasonable and probable grounds for making a warrantless arrest. 2) The Court found the search of the vehicle was conducted incidental to arrest and both the arrest and search were lawful with no Charter rights breached.