The police exceeded the power of the warrant by not conducting their search of Slaveski’s shop in a reasonable manner. A reasonable search, given the scope of the warrant, should have taken 60 minutes. The police conducted an unreasonably exhaustive search, which took 90 minutes. The police therefore trespassed at the plaintiff’s shop for 30 minutes.
The police were legally justified in making a record of the search of Slaveski’s shop. However, this film needed to be confined to the terms of the warrant. Any filming of Slaveski’s shop that did not relate to the search or the area to be searched was a trespass.
The police were entitled only to seize and review documents that were described in the warrant. The police seized and transcribed (copied) a number of other documents that were not described in the warrant. This was a trespass of the plaintiff’s documents.
This is because it was found that the police used only reasonable force in making an arrest which did not constitute assault and battery.