Andrew Nisker

The accused was charged with possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking after police found 9 ounces of the drug in the bed of his pickup truck during a search incident to a warrantless arrest.

The accused brought a Charter application alleging breaches of his s. 8 and s. 9 rights, arguing police lacked reasonable grounds for the arrest.

The court dismissed the Charter application, finding the police had both subjective and objective reasonable grounds based on surveillance of the accused meeting with a known drug supplier.

At trial, the court rejected the accused's testimony as a complete fabrication and found that the circumstantial evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he had knowledge and control of the drugs.

The accused was found guilty.

The applicant pled guilty to drug trafficking offences but sought a stay of two counts of cocaine trafficking, alleging entrapment.

He argued police lacked reasonable suspicion that he was trafficking cocaine before providing him the opportunity to sell it to an undercover officer.

The court dismissed the application, finding that police had formed the requisite reasonable suspicion based on reliable confidential informant tips, extensive surveillance, and the applicant's own statements to the undercover officer prior to the drug transaction.

The offender, a 33-year-old first offender, was found guilty of possession of cocaine and marijuana for the purpose of trafficking, and possession of proceeds of crime.

The police seized over 400 grams of cocaine, over 700 grams of marijuana, and $7,225 in cash from his home.

The Crown sought a sentence of 5 to 5.5 years, while the defence sought 2 to 3 years.

The court weighed the aggravating factors of the large quantity of drugs and profit motive against the mitigating factors of the offender's lack of a criminal record, employment, and family support.

The court imposed a global sentence of 45 months, reduced to 35 months after crediting 10 months for pre-sentence detention and restrictive bail conditions.

The accused was charged with possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking after police found 31.58 grams of crystal meth in his possession.

He pleaded guilty to simple possession but contested the trafficking charge.

The Crown relied heavily on expert evidence from a police detective regarding typical consumption and trafficking patterns to argue the quantity was too large for personal use.

The court excluded portions of the expert's evidence that touched on the ultimate issue or lacked a reliable foundation.

Ultimately, the court found that while the quantity was large, it was not impossible for it to be for personal use, and the absence of other trafficking indicia left a reasonable doubt.

The accused was acquitted of trafficking but convicted of simple possession.

The accused was charged with possession of crack cocaine for the purpose of trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime.

He was stopped by police for a by-law infraction at a transit station, which escalated into an arrest and search incident to arrest after an officer observed him moving a bag of drugs.

The accused brought a Charter motion alleging violations of his ss. 8, 9, and 10(b) rights, arguing the police fabricated the grounds for arrest.

The court dismissed the Charter motion, finding the officer's account credible and that reasonable grounds existed for the arrest.

The accused was found guilty of possession for the purpose of trafficking and not guilty of possession of proceeds of crime.