Christopher Rudnicki

The accused applied for bail pending his appeal of an impaired driving conviction.

He argued that his s. 10(b) Charter rights were violated when police defaulted to duty counsel instead of allowing him to contact his counsel of choice, and that the trial judge erred in treating his blood alcohol reading as an indicia of impairment.

The court found that the roadside indicia of impairment were obtained prior to the alleged Charter breach and lacked a sufficient temporal, contextual, or causal connection to be excluded under s. 24(2).

The court also rejected the argument regarding the trial judge's factual introduction.

Concluding that the appeal was frivolous, the court denied bail pending appeal.

The offenders, both youthful members of a street gang, were convicted of second-degree murder following a planned, gang-related shooting that resulted in the death of an unarmed victim.

The Crown sought a parole ineligibility period near the 25-year maximum, while the defence sought 12 to 15 years, arguing systemic discrimination should mitigate the sentence.

The court rejected the systemic discrimination argument, finding the gravity of the offence eclipsed such factors.

Weighing the egregious nature of the planned shooting against the offenders' youth, the court sentenced both offenders to life imprisonment with no eligibility for parole for 15 years.