Conor X. Kyte

The accused was charged with breaching a release order that prohibited him from going to his ex-partner's residence.

After a scheduled visit with his children was cancelled, he drove to the residence, stayed on the public roadway, and placed cookies in the mailbox.

He argued that he relied on advice from the releasing police officer, who told him he would not be in breach as long as he stayed off the property.

The court found that accessing the mailbox constituted a breach of the condition.

The court rejected the excuse of de minimus non curat lex, noting it is generally unavailable for breaches of orders designed to protect victims of intimate partner violence.

However, the court found the accused successfully established the excuse of officially induced error, as he reasonably relied on the erroneous legal advice of the releasing officer.

A judicial stay of proceedings was entered.

The offender, a 39-year-old woman with no criminal record and an alcohol addiction, pleaded guilty to breaching a release order by consuming alcohol.

She had spent six days in pre-sentence custody.

The Crown and defence proposed a joint submission of one additional day in custody, driven entirely by the practical necessity of securing police transport for the offender to retrieve her belongings from a remote detention centre.

The court rejected the joint submission as contrary to the public interest, finding that imposing a criminal record for an addiction-related breach under these circumstances was disproportionate.

The court granted an absolute discharge, highlighting the systemic failures and practical hardships caused by the closure of local jails and reliance on remote detention facilities.