Anthony Robbins

Tremar Thorpe pleaded guilty to possession of a loaded and prohibited firearm.

The offence involved pointing the gun at a victim and making racist remarks.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the nature of the firearm, its loaded and defaced state, its accessibility, and the offender's use of it.

Mitigating factors included the offender's youth, early guilty plea, remorse, strong community support, prosocial goals, and time spent on strict bail conditions.

The Crown sought a 3-4 year penitentiary sentence, while the Defence sought a conditional sentence.

The court emphasized deterrence and denunciation as paramount objectives for gun crimes, ultimately imposing a 28-month penitentiary sentence, reduced to 22 months after credit for pre-trial custody and stringent bail conditions, along with a 10-year firearms prohibition and a DNA order.

The accused pleaded guilty to four counts of robbery arising from eight bank robberies committed over one week in July 2017 while in the throes of a crack cocaine addiction.

The Crown sought six years imprisonment emphasizing general and specific deterrence, denunciation, and separation from society.

The defence sought a reformatory sentence of two years less one day, arguing that meaningful treatment in the provincial system would better serve rehabilitation.

The court imposed a sentence of five years less seventeen months presentence custody, resulting in three years and seven months remaining to serve.

The court found that while rehabilitation prospects remained limited, the seriousness of the offences, the vulnerable nature of the victims, the extensive criminal record, and the need for deterrence and denunciation were paramount considerations.

This ruling addresses the admissibility of statements made by the accused, Terrence Barrett, who is charged with second-degree murder and aggravated assault.

The Crown sought to admit various utterances and two videotaped statements made to police.

The defence argued that the statements were involuntary due to Barrett's medical and mental state and oppressive conditions, and that his right to counsel under s. 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was infringed.

The court found that the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the statements were voluntary and that Barrett's Charter rights were not infringed.

Consequently, the Crown's application to admit the statements was granted, and the defence application to exclude them was dismissed.

At a preliminary inquiry, the Crown sought committal on first degree murder for the stabbing death of Milan Segota, with the defence conceding second degree murder.

The Crown also sought committal on aggravated assault for injuries to Aimee Novak, with the defence conceding assault with a weapon.

The court examined whether circumstantial evidence supported inferences of planning and deliberation necessary for first degree murder.

The court found insufficient evidence of planning and deliberation, distinguishing the case from situations involving armed ambush or premeditated knife acquisition.

The defendant was committed to stand trial on second degree murder and aggravated assault.

Sentencing followed a guilty plea to careless storage of a firearm after more serious possession charges were not pursued.

The court reviewed denunciation, deterrence, rehabilitation, proportionality, and parity principles under the Criminal Code, with detailed analysis of custodial and conditional sentence authorities.

While recognizing the seriousness of loaded firearms offences, the court distinguished authorities involving more serious companion offences and found the offender's first-offender status, guilty plea, compliance on bail, and community safety assessment supported a community-based disposition.

A conditional sentence was imposed with strict curfew, community service, abstinence, weapons restrictions, and ancillary prohibition and forfeiture orders.

The applicant sought to exclude a loaded handgun seized during the execution of a search warrant at his residence, alleging multiple Charter breaches under sections 8 and 10(b).

The court found that while the police breached the applicant's right to counsel by delaying access for 4.5 hours, and overstepped the warrant by seizing excluded items and searching a cell phone without a warrant, the telewarrant itself was validly issued and executed.

Applying the Grant framework, the court concluded that the breaches were at the less serious end of the continuum, did not produce the firearm, and that society's interest in adjudicating serious gun charges on their merits outweighed the impact of the breaches.

The application to exclude the evidence was dismissed.

The applicant applied for a stay of proceedings under section 24 of the Charter, arguing his right to be tried within a reasonable time under section 11(b) was infringed.

The total delay from the charge to the anticipated trial date was approximately 28 months.

The court analyzed the delay using the Morin framework, attributing portions to inherent time, Crown delay, and institutional delay.

The court found the total attributable delay was modestly above the guidelines for a two-stage process.

However, balancing the delay against the lack of significant prejudice to the applicant and the seriousness of the firearms charges, the court dismissed the application.