Application for cellphone evidence to be admitted at trial — lawfulness of production order — drugs — McLean v R [2015] NZCA 101 — Wardell-Ruby v R [2016] NZCA 155 — W v R [2017] NZCA 522 — Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 101 — Search and Surveillance Act 2012, s 72 — Evidence Act 2006, s 30. The Crown applied for an order allowing evidence obtained from the defendant's cellphone via a production order to be admitted at trial. A member of the public had found a cellphone and had handed it in to the police. The police searched the phone and found messages relating to drug sales sent to and from the phone. The police obtained a production order for data from the cellphone, as well as two others that had sent messages to and from the found phone. Some of the messages on the phone were sent to and from the defendant, giving rise to the charges against him. The defendant challenged the evidence, saying there were no grounds to justify the production order, the 24-day period of the production order was too long, and that part of the time period covered by the production order had no connection to the messages found on the phone. The Court found that there were reasonable grounds to issue the production order, as the messages on the phone clearly referred to drug offending. Also the 24- day period was not excessive, given that drug-dealing is by nature a long-term and continuing activity. For the latter reason, it was also allowable for the production order to cover a period not directly connected to the messages. The Court found that in any case the evidence could be introduced under s 30 of the Evidence Act, as the police had not acted in bad faith and had gained evidence relating to serious offending. Judgment Date: 20 April 2018.