Christopher Raimondo

This decision concerns a youth sentence review for N.M., who pleaded guilty to second-degree murder.

N.M. sought to convert the balance of his custodial term to community supervision, which the Crown opposed.

The court granted N.M.'s application, finding that he met the high standard required for early conditional supervision.

The judge emphasized N.M.'s significant rehabilitative progress, strong personal support network, and criticized the provincial government's handling of his transition from youth to adult correctional facilities, which hindered his rehabilitation.

N.M., a young person convicted of second-degree murder, sought a variation of his youth sentence under s. 94 of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, requesting release into the community.

The Crown sought to confirm the sentence.

The court reviewed N.M.'s progress and institutional conduct, noting significant issues with his placement in adult maximum security facilities post-sentence, which hindered his rehabilitation.

Despite these systemic failures and N.M.'s positive attitude, the court found that N.M. had not yet met the burden to justify a sentence variation.

The sentence was confirmed, but an earlier optional review was scheduled for June 2024, acknowledging N.M.'s progress and the system's shortcomings.

N.M., a young person, pleaded guilty to second-degree murder of his foster father.

The Crown sought an adult sentence, arguing N.M. had sufficient maturity and that a youth sentence would be insufficient for accountability.

The court considered N.M.'s disadvantaged background, emotional development issues, and the cumulative pressures he faced, including racism and family dysfunction.

The judge found that the Crown failed to rebut the presumption of diminished moral blameworthiness and that a youth sentence could hold N.M. accountable.

N.M. was sentenced to a youth sentence of seven years, comprising three-and-a-half years in custody and three-and-a-half years under conditional supervision, with no credit for pre-sentence custody.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to Revoke the appellant's registration as a Class 1 Transfer Service under the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002.

The allegations included unethical conduct regarding an infant cremation, regulatory breaches concerning consumer contracts and price lists, and misleading the Registrar about the day-to-day management of the business.

The Tribunal found that the appellant mishandled the infant's remains by using a repurposed cardboard shipping box instead of a proper casket, failed to comply with disclosure and price list regulations, and operated with an unlicensed day-to-day manager.

The Tribunal concluded that the appellant's past conduct afforded reasonable grounds for belief that the business would not be carried on in accordance with the law and with integrity and honesty.

The Tribunal ordered the Registrar to carry out the proposal to revoke the appellant's licence.

The appellant requested a hearing regarding the Registrar's proposal to revoke and immediately suspend its Transfer Service Operator – Class 1 licence.

At a teleconference hearing, the parties agreed to adjourn the matter to allow for document exchange and a case conference.

On consent, the Tribunal ordered that the immediate suspension of the appellant's licence be extended until the conclusion of the hearing, pursuant to section 19(3)(b) of the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002.

Procedural directions and dates for the continuation of the hearing were also set.