http://canlii.org/eliisa/highlight.d...07bcpc224.html
That's the actual case if anyone is interested. I just read through it and think that it probably will be overturned on appeal. However, I think judges need to smack the officers involved around a wee bit.
I agree that there is a lower expectation of privacy at a port of entry and that you are compelled to answer questions and submit to a search of your belongings or vehicle. That much is not in dispute.
What bothers me about this case, and how some officers at the border conduct themselves generally, is the attitude of the officers towards the law.
"I can search for whatever I want wherever I want."
"You aren't permitted to leave but you have no rights unless I say so."
"I spend dozens of hours every month interviewing people crossing the border and my instincts and suspicions are infallible."
Of course I'm exaggerating and generalizing but at times you encounter border officers that wish they were cowboys in the wild west. Reading between the lines in this case, you can kind of see the judge rebuking the officers for a similar attitude. A little common sense and more professional attitude and there would have been a slam-dunk drug conviction here...