Danielle Marie Garbaty

The offender, Jonathan Weir, pleaded guilty to manslaughter after killing his best friend with an unlawfully possessed, prohibited machine gun.

The court considered the appropriate sentence, including the four-year minimum for manslaughter with a firearm, and arguments regarding police misconduct during arrest and detention.

The judge found Weir's moral blameworthiness to be high, closer to criminal negligence than a "near accident," due to his reckless handling and storage of firearms and ammunition while intoxicated.

While acknowledging some police misconduct (improper strip searches), the court found it not egregious enough to justify a sentence below the statutory minimum.

The final sentence was 51 months (4¼ years) after credits for pre-sentence custody, rights violations, and strict bail conditions.

Christian Dean faced a charge of driving with excess alcohol.

He brought a Charter application to exclude breath test evidence, alleging violations of his rights under sections 8 and 9 due to a delay in the Approved Screening Device (ASD) demand.

The court found the delay (approximately 5-7 minutes) was "reasonably necessary" in the context of the stop, applying the principles from R. v. Quansah.

The court dismissed the Charter application, finding no breach of rights.

Consequently, the defendant was found guilty.

The defendant was charged with impaired driving and refusing a breath test.

The court dismissed the refusal charge due to significant police failures in implementing the defendant's right to counsel under the Charter, including not assisting in locating a named lawyer and failing to advise about duty counsel or the consequences of refusal.

However, the court found no Charter breach regarding the right to counsel at the roadside for the impaired driving charge, preferring the officer's testimony.

Based on civilian and police observations of erratic driving, signs of alcohol impairment (odour, bloodshot eyes, unsteadiness, slurred speech), and lack of judgment in leaving an accident scene, the defendant was found guilty of impaired driving.

Related Highway Traffic Act charges were also dismissed.

The applicant brought a directed verdict motion on two grounds: first, challenging the applicability of the prior section 258 presumption of identity (the Shaikh argument), and second, challenging whether the new section 320.31 presumption of accuracy could apply to the facts (the Flores-Vigil argument).

The court dismissed the application in whole.

The court found that there was sufficient evidence from which a trier of fact could apply the new presumption of accuracy under section 320.31, as the breath technician was trained and qualified, the alcohol standard was certified by an analyst as suitable for use, and the technician's knowledge of the target value was part of her training.

The court reserved written reasons on the Shaikh point.

A police sergeant charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle and operating a motor vehicle with greater than 80 mg of alcohol in 100 mL of blood following a collision with a motorcycle.

The defendant challenged the admissibility of evidence on Charter grounds, including allegations of breaches of sections 7, 8, 9, and 10(b).

The court found that while the defendant's initial statements to the first officer were compelled under the Highway Traffic Act and therefore excluded, subsequent statements and observations provided sufficient grounds for arrest and breath demand.

The court rejected the defendant's credibility and found her guilty of both charges based on the observations of multiple officers who knew her in a sober state, the breath test results, and the toxicological evidence.

The Crown brought an application at a preliminary inquiry for an order permitting audio/video recording of testimony from certain witnesses in a first-degree murder case.

The Crown argued that the evidence of witnesses directly involved in the alleged offence or closely associated with the accused was vulnerable and that videotaping would preserve a complete record for potential use under Criminal Code section 715(1) if witnesses became unavailable or hostile at trial.

The defence argued the court lacked jurisdiction to order videotaping.

The court granted the application in part, permitting videotaping of witnesses directly implicated in the offence but denying it for family members and associates not implicated in the crime.

The Crown brought a motion to remove defence counsel David Locke from representing the accused Narankar Dhillon on a first-degree murder charge at a preliminary hearing, alleging a conflict of interest based on Locke's prior professional relationships with three individuals: a Crown witness (Avtar Sidhu), a potential Crown witness (Manpreet Padda), and a co-accused (Charnjit Boughan).

The Crown argued that these prior relationships created a conflict that could undermine the fairness of the trial and public confidence in the administration of justice.

The accused opposed the motion, asserting his Charter right to counsel of choice and proposing that the conflict could be eliminated through an informed instruction to Locke not to cross-examine Sidhu or Padda.

The court dismissed the Crown's application, finding that the prior relationships were remote and that the accused's informed waiver of cross-examination eliminated any potential conflict.

Sentencing decision for dangerous driving causing death.

The accused was convicted after trial of driving at 152 kph (three times the speed limit) while entering a village on a Saturday night during March break, striking and killing a 13-year-old pedestrian.

The Crown sought 18 months incarceration; the defence sought a maximum of six months.

The court imposed nine months incarceration followed by 24 months probation with 175 hours of community service and an 18-month driving prohibition, balancing the gravity of the offense and need for general deterrence against the accused's youth, exemplary background, genuine remorse, and rehabilitation prospects.

The accused was charged with impaired driving and "over 80" following a R.I.D.E. spot check.

The Crown relied on an Approved Screening Device (ASD) breath test failure and subsequent Intoxilyzer breath samples.

The defence challenged whether the officer had reasonable and probable grounds to arrest based on the ASD result, whether the officer breached the accused's Charter rights under sections 8, 9, and 10(b), and whether evidence should be excluded under section 24(2).

The court found that while the officer was entitled to administer the ASD test without delay, he breached the accused's rights by delaying 12 minutes before providing section 10(b) rights and by failing to make the breath demand "as soon as practicable" as required by section 254(3) of the Criminal Code.

The court excluded the breath test evidence under section 24(2) and acquitted the accused on both charges.

The defendant was convicted after trial on six counts of fraud for stealing approximately $5,000 from the Shelburne Branch of the Royal Canadian Legion Poppy Fund while serving as president.

The Crown sought jail time, while the defence sought a conditional sentence.

The court imposed a one-year conditional sentence to be served in the community with strict conditions, including electronic monitoring for the first six months, house arrest restrictions, and a subsequent 12-month probation period.

The court found that while theft from a position of trust is serious and ordinarily requires incarceration, the defendant's age, health status, prior good character, and the disproportionate impact of jail warranted a conditional sentence.

The defendant was charged with operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding 80 milligrams per 100 millilitres of blood, contrary to the Criminal Code.

The Crown alleged the defendant was stopped for speeding and subsequently failed an approved screening device test and provided breath samples over the legal limit.

The defendant raised Charter arguments regarding his right to counsel and advanced a bolus drinking defence.

The court found no Charter breach, rejected the bolus drinking defence based on the defendant's lack of credibility, and convicted the defendant of the over 80 charge.

The defendant also pleaded guilty to two Provincial Offences Act charges (speeding and driver having alcohol readily available), with sentencing suspended on those counts.

The Crown sought to admit pharmacy prescription records obtained pursuant to a production order as evidence in a trial involving allegations of diverted funds from the Shelburne Branch of the Royal Canadian Legion.

The defendant objected to the admission of the documents.

The court ruled that the records were admissible as business records under the Canada Evidence Act, finding that the electronic documents satisfied the best evidence rule under Sections 31.1 through 31.4 of the Act.

The court found that the records were kept in the usual and ordinary course of business by a disinterested party, with integrity backed by professional obligations imposed by the Ontario College of Pharmacists.

The defendant was convicted after plea of internet child luring contrary to Section 172.1(1) of the Criminal Code.

The defendant communicated online with a 17-year-old complainant under false pretences, claiming to be a pornographic modelling agent, and arranged to meet her for sexual purposes.

The defendant also engaged with a fictional 14-year-old character created by police.

The Crown sought 9 to 12 months imprisonment plus three years probation, emphasizing general deterrence and denunciation.

The defence argued for a lengthy conditional sentence.

The court imposed an 18-month conditional sentence to be served in the community with strict conditions, including electronic monitoring, house arrest for the first nine months, curfew for the second nine months, community service, counselling, and restrictions on internet use.

The court balanced the serious nature of the offence and need for deterrence against the defendant's guilty plea, lack of prior relevant record, and prospects for rehabilitation in the community.