3 total
Offender sentenced to 26 months for cocaine trafficking after credits for strict bail and post-verdict delay.
The offender was found guilty of possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking and two counts of failing to comply with release conditions.
The court considered the offender's difficult upbringing, the impact of anti-Black racism, and his strict bail conditions as mitigating factors.
The court also found a breach of the offender's s. 11(b) Charter rights due to a 27-day post-verdict delay, reducing the sentence by two months.
The offender was sentenced to a total of 26 months' imprisonment.
Accused found guilty of possession for the purpose of trafficking; Charter application to exclude evidence dismissed.
The accused was charged with possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, possession of cannabis for distribution, and failure to comply with release conditions.
Following a surveillance operation, police conducted a high-risk takedown and arrested the accused for breaching his recognizance.
A subsequent search of his vehicle revealed a kilogram of cocaine and a pound of cannabis.
The accused brought a Charter application alleging breaches of his ss. 8 and 10(a) rights.
The court found a technical s. 10(a) breach but declined to exclude the evidence under s. 24(2).
The court found the accused guilty of the cocaine and breach charges, relying on constructive possession, but acquitted him of the cannabis charge due to insufficient evidence of a purpose of distribution.
Crown appeal allowed; conditional sentence for assault causing bodily harm varied to six months' imprisonment.
The Crown appealed the sentence imposed on the respondent for assault causing bodily harm.
The trial judge had imposed a two-year conditional sentence concurrent to a jail sentence.
The Court of Appeal found multiple errors of law, including imposing a conditional sentence concurrent to a jail sentence, exceeding the maximum length for a conditional sentence, and effectively imposing a penitentiary sentence when accounting for pre-trial custody.
The Court also found a conditional sentence manifestly inappropriate given the respondent's record and the unprovoked nature of the attack.
The appeal was allowed, and the sentence was varied to an additional six months' imprisonment.