Although this is not a driving case, the case does reinforce the importance of police "acting by what they reasonably thought were lawful means to pursue an important law enforcement purpose." Reviewing the record at trial, the Supreme Court concluded that Mr. Spencer's s. 8 Charter right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure was breached. However, with the reasonableness of the investigating officer's conduct being one of the factors analyzed, the Supreme Court concluded that the evidence obtained should not be excluded and upheld its admission. R. v. Spencer, 2014 SCC 43
The case uses this an example: "if the trial judge and three judges of the Court of Appeal concluded that the officer had acted lawfully, his belief was clearly reasonable."