Alice Bradstreet

The offender was convicted of possession of a restricted firearm, a prohibited over-capacity magazine, and possession of cocaine and heroin for the purpose of trafficking.

The court weighed aggravating factors, including the commercial nature of the drug operation and the presence of a firearm, against mitigating factors such as the offender's lack of a criminal record and strong family support.

The court imposed a total sentence of 4 years' imprisonment, with the firearm offences to be served consecutively to the drug offences.

The offender received enhanced credit for harsh pre-trial custody conditions and strict bail conditions, resulting in a remaining sentence of 631 days.

During a trial for multiple ATM robberies, the Crown brought an application to admit evidence of each robbery as similar fact evidence on all counts to prove identity.

The Crown argued that the perpetrators shared a specific modus operandi and wore distinctive clothing, including a bleach-stained hoodie and specific combinations of other garments.

The court applied the Handy and Arp frameworks, finding that the cumulative similarities in the manner of the robberies and the unique clothing worn by the perpetrators established a high degree of similarity.

The court concluded that the probative value of the evidence outweighed any prejudicial effect and granted the application.

The court considered whether amendments to section 535 of the Criminal Code, effective September 19, 2019, which restricted preliminary inquiries to offences carrying a maximum sentence of 14 years or more, applied retroactively to invalidate elections for preliminary inquiries made before the amendment.

The Crown argued that prior elections were nullified and the court lacked jurisdiction.

The defence argued the amendment did not apply retroactively to vested rights and that validly made elections survived the enactment.

The court found itself bound by the Superior Court decision in R. v. R.S., which held that the Ontario Court of Justice lost jurisdiction to conduct preliminary inquiries except for offences with a 14-year maximum penalty as of September 19, 2019.

The accused was charged with firearm and drug trafficking offences after police executed a search warrant at his family home, finding a loaded handgun, cocaine, heroin, and cash in a bedroom.

At trial, a defence witness unexpectedly testified that the firearm belonged to him.

Police arrested and interviewed the witness mid-testimony, prompting the defence to bring an abuse of process application alleging witness tampering.

The court dismissed the application, finding the police acted within their lawful ancillary powers to investigate the witness's confession.

On the merits, the court rejected the witness's confession as not credible and found the accused guilty of all charges based on constructive possession.