A. Gold

Sentencing on a guilty plea to careless driving causing death contrary to s. 130(3) of the Highway Traffic Act.

The defendant drove a van at high speed toward a boat launch ramp in a parking lot adjacent to Ashbridges Bay, mistaking it for an exit road.

The vehicle entered the icy waters of Lake Ontario and sank, resulting in the death of the front-seat passenger who was trapped by an interior security cage.

The original charge of dangerous driving causing death under the Criminal Code was withdrawn after the Crown determined insufficient evidence of a marked departure from the standard of care.

A joint submission was accepted pursuant to R. v. Anthony-Cook.

Sentence comprised time served of four months actual custody with enhanced credit of six months less a day, twelve months probation with counselling conditions, a five-year driving suspension, and a victim fine surcharge.

The accused, facing historical sexual abuse charges, brought an application to exclude a recorded telephone conversation between himself and the complainant.

The accused argued the recording was more prejudicial than probative.

The court found the recording had significant probative value, as the accused's failure to deny the allegations and his apology could be construed as an admission.

The court also found no moral or reasoning prejudice would result from its admission.

The application to exclude the evidence was dismissed.

The accused brought a motion to adjourn his criminal jury trial, arguing that the Chief Justice's order excluding unvaccinated individuals from serving as jurors violated his rights under sections 11(d) and 11(f) of the Charter.

The accused contended that the order excluded a particular group of independent-minded people, thereby depriving him of a representative jury.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that vaccination status is not a relevant characteristic for jury representativeness and that the exclusion of unvaccinated individuals does not violate the Charter.

The accused, driving a tractor-trailer southbound on a snow-covered highway, attempted to pass another vehicle in poor visibility and whiteout conditions.

He collided with a northbound tractor-trailer, resulting in the death of the other driver.

The court rejected the accused's testimony that he lost control due to an unexpected whiteout, finding instead that he deliberately initiated an unsafe pass without checking for oncoming traffic.

The court concluded this manoeuvre was a marked departure from the standard of care of a reasonable driver and found the accused guilty of dangerous driving causing death.

The applicants, three police officers charged with sexual assault, brought an application for a stay of proceedings under s. 11(b) of the Charter due to delay.

The Crown had obtained a direct indictment, moving the trial to the Superior Court without a preliminary inquiry.

The applicants argued the 18-month presumptive ceiling from Jordan should apply because they were denied a preliminary inquiry.

The court rejected this argument, holding that the 30-month ceiling applies to all cases tried in the Superior Court, regardless of whether a preliminary inquiry actually occurs.

As the anticipated delay was 28 months, falling below the 30-month ceiling, the application for a stay was dismissed.

The offender pleaded guilty to manslaughter after originally being charged with second degree murder in the death of his common law spouse.

Psychiatric evidence established that the offender suffered from a persecutory-type delusional disorder that significantly diminished his moral culpability.

The court considered the sentencing range for domestic manslaughter and the mitigating effect of mental illness, concluding that denunciation and deterrence carried reduced weight where the offence arose from severe psychiatric impairment.

The court imposed a custodial sentence within the agreed range and addressed the proper credit for pre‑sentence custody under s. 719 of the Criminal Code following amendments introduced by the Truth in Sentencing Act.

The offender received enhanced credit of 1.2:1 for time spent in pre‑sentence custody based on the particular circumstances of detention, including mental health considerations and institutional conditions.