What is the test for obtaining a general warrant to search a person's home?

The general warrant issued in this case is defective for a number of reasons. At the outset it should be noted that it is worded incorrectly. The form is wrong. There is no "General (Surreptitious Entry) Warrant". Furthermore, the wording of the warrant exceeds the scope of the section in that it authorizes a peace officer to search the property for evidence which "may be obtained" as opposed to "will be obtained". That in of itself is not fatal in light of the reasoning in Baron v. Canada (1993), 1993 CanLII 154 (SCC), 78 C.C.C. (3d) 510 (S.C.C.). Sopinka J. at p. 534 made the following comments: I conclude, therefore, that the standard "may afford evidence" when coupled with a requirement of credibly based probability that the things sought are likely to be found, passes constitutional muster. I find support for this conclusion in the fact that, at common law, "may afford evidence" was considered a sufficient test for the issue of a warrant. ....