Christian Steuart

The accused, charged with drug trafficking offences, brought Charter applications under ss. 8, 10(a), and 10(b) to exclude evidence seized during the execution of a search warrant at a residence and a pat-down search.

The accused challenged the sufficiency of the redacted Information to Obtain (ITO) based on a confidential informant's tip.

The court found the judicial summary sufficient for the accused to make full answer and defence and upheld the search warrant's validity.

The court also dismissed the s. 10(a) and 10(b) claims, finding the brief delay in advising the accused of his right to counsel during a pat-down search was justified by officer safety, and the delay in implementing the right to counsel was reasonable given the circumstances.

The applications were dismissed.

The accused was charged with possession of crack cocaine, possession of crack cocaine and fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking, and possession of proceeds of crime following the execution of a search warrant at a residence.

The Crown relied on circumstantial evidence to prove constructive possession of drugs and cash found in a basement bedroom closet.

The court found the accused guilty of possession of crack cocaine for the purpose of trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime, relying on the presence of his wallet, mail, and male clothing in the room.

The court found the accused not guilty of possession of fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking, but guilty of the lesser included offence of simple possession.

The offender was convicted by a jury of second-degree murder for stabbing his best friend 12 times in an unprovoked attack fueled by jealousy over a former domestic partner.

The Crown and defence presented a joint submission of 13 years of parole ineligibility.

The court accepted the joint submission, finding it within the appropriate range of 11-15 years, and sentenced the offender to life imprisonment with no parole eligibility for 13 years, along with DNA, weapons prohibition, and no-contact orders.

The applicant, facing multiple charges including sexual assault and attempted child abduction, applied for a review of his detention after spending 911 days in pre-trial custody.

The court found that the significant passage of time, combined with the harsh conditions of pre-trial detention during the COVID-19 pandemic, constituted a material change in circumstances triggering jurisdiction for a review.

The court concluded that a stringent release plan, including house arrest, a $100,000 surety, and GPS ankle monitoring, sufficiently attenuated the risks to public safety and maintained confidence in the administration of justice.

The detention order was vacated and the applicant was released on strict conditions.