Darren Garth Anger

The defendant was convicted after trial of possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking.

Police discovered 169 pounds of marijuana in a van that the defendant was driving after he breached a police roadblock.

The Crown sought a sentence of nine to twelve months' imprisonment, while the defence sought a ninety-day intermittent sentence.

The court imposed a ninety-day intermittent sentence with three years' probation, community service, and an enhanced victim surcharge, balancing denunciation and deterrence with rehabilitation and the defendant's personal circumstances, including his long-term permanent resident status and family ties in Canada.

A defendant was charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking in prescription drugs following a traffic stop and roadside search.

The court conducted a Charter application to determine whether evidence obtained during the stop should be excluded.

The defendant challenged the lawfulness of the investigative detention, the warrantless search of her purse and vehicle, and the denial of timely access to counsel.

The court found that the detention was arbitrary, lacking reasonable suspicion; the search was unlawful, as there was no valid consent and no genuine officer safety concern; and access to counsel was improperly delayed.

The court excluded all evidence obtained as a result of these Charter breaches under section 24(2), finding that admission would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

The accused was charged with possession of cocaine for the purposes of trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime (money over $5,000).

The Crown relied on expert evidence regarding the quantity of cocaine seized (104 grams packaged in four separate baggies), drug paraphernalia (scale, spoon, baggies), cash found in the residence, and a recorded telephone conversation.

The defence argued the cocaine was for personal use and that much of the money found belonged to the accused's partner.

The trial judge found that key facts relied upon by the Crown's expert were not proven at trial, significantly diminishing the probative value of the expert opinion.

The court found reasonable doubt existed regarding the trafficking charges and convicted only on simple possession.

The defendant was tried on charges of possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime.

Police acting on information from a confidential informant conducted surveillance of the defendant, observing him make three brief visits to high-crime locations over 40 minutes.

Upon arrest, police seized 19.9 grams of crack cocaine, four cell phones, a knife, and $1,275 in cash.

The defendant challenged the admissibility of the evidence on Charter grounds.

The court found that police had reasonable and probable grounds to arrest based on the totality of circumstances, including the credibility of the informant, the compelling nature of the information, and police corroboration through surveillance.

The court admitted the evidence and found the defendant guilty of both charges.

The accused was charged with trafficking in a fentanyl patch contrary to section 5(3)(a) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

She attended a detention centre to deliver forms to an inmate.

A fentanyl patch was discovered attached to one of her personal documents by a correctional officer during inspection.

The accused denied knowledge of the patch.

The court applied the R. v. W.(D.) framework and found that while the Crown's evidence raised suspicions, it did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused knew of or was complicit in the smuggling.

The charge was dismissed.

The accused was charged with trafficking in a Fentanyl Patch contrary to section 5(3)(a) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

The accused elected trial in the Ontario Court of Justice and pled not guilty.

The Crown sought to introduce an analyst's certificate regarding the substance found.

The defence argued that proper notice of the certificate had not been given to counsel because the documents were served on counsel's agent but never reached counsel personally.

The court ruled that service on counsel's authorized agent constitutes valid service on counsel, and the failure of the agent to deliver the documents to counsel does not invalidate the service.

The certificate was admitted into evidence.

The accused pleaded guilty to importing marijuana and possessing marijuana for the purpose of trafficking.

She was caught at the Peace Bridge in Fort Erie with 62 pounds of marijuana hidden in vehicle panels.

The Crown sought two years imprisonment; the defence sought a conditional sentence or blended sentence.

The court rejected a pure conditional sentence but imposed a blended sentence consisting of a 90-day intermittent sentence (served on weekends over approximately seven months) for the importation offence and a 21-month conditional sentence with strict conditions for the possession for trafficking offence.

The court balanced the seriousness of the offence against the offender's personal circumstances, including her lack of prior record, financial desperation, role as a courier, and family responsibilities.

The accused pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking.

The Crown sought a sentence of 15 months imprisonment, while defence counsel sought a conditional sentence followed by probation.

The court rejected the conditional sentence, finding it inconsistent with the fundamental purpose and principles of sentencing, particularly given the seriousness of drug trafficking offences and the need for denunciation and general deterrence.

The court imposed a sentence of time served (six days pre-sentence custody credited as 12 days) plus 258 additional days of imprisonment (equivalent to nine months), followed by three years of probation, along with ancillary orders including a firearms prohibition, DNA order, and forfeiture order.

Criminal trial for importing marijuana into Canada and possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking.

Border officers discovered approximately 150 pounds of marijuana in duffel bags hidden in the sleeper compartment of a commercial truck entering Canada, along with US$23,000 concealed under a passenger seat.

The accused claimed a stranger had placed the bags in his truck while he briefly left it unlocked and that he did not know their contents.

The court rejected the explanation and held that the accused either knew the contents or was willfully blind, having accepted payment and failed to make obvious inquiries.

The Crown proved the essential elements of both offences beyond a reasonable doubt.

The accused applied for a declaration that his arrest and the subsequent search of his vehicle violated ss. 8 and 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Police arrested the accused after surveillance based largely on untested confidential informant information and ambiguous observations of a brief meeting between vehicles.

The court held that the police lacked objectively reasonable and probable grounds for arrest, as the informant information was insufficiently verified and the observed conduct was not inherently incriminating.

The arrest therefore constituted arbitrary detention and the search incidental to arrest was unlawful.

Applying the framework in Grant, the court found the Charter breaches sufficiently serious that admitting the discovered drugs would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

The accused pleaded guilty to possessing a genuine Nigerian passport that could be used to establish identity contrary to section 122(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, and to misrepresenting or withholding material facts relating to the true identity of a passenger that could induce an error in the administration of the Act contrary to section 127(a).

The Crown sought a custodial sentence of approximately nine months, while defence counsel sought a conditional sentence.

The court imposed a conditional sentence of one year to be served in the community with strict conditions, including house arrest for the first six months, community service, and ongoing supervision.

The accused was charged with possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime.

Police officers arrested the accused as a passenger in a vehicle bearing stolen licence plates and conducted a search incidental to arrest, discovering cocaine and cash.

The court found that the arrest was unlawful because the officers lacked objectively reasonable grounds to believe the accused possessed the stolen licence plates.

The court excluded the evidence under section 24(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, finding that the long-term interests of the administration of justice favoured exclusion despite the seriousness of the charges.

Both charges were dismissed.

The accused pleaded guilty to two counts of possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking.

He was arrested on September 28, 2011, with 36.5 grams of cocaine and admitted to possessing an additional 59 grams at his residence.

While awaiting resolution of those charges, he was found with 288.5 grams of cocaine on February 16, 2012.

The court imposed consecutive sentences totaling 48 months imprisonment, along with ancillary orders including a DNA order, firearms prohibition, and forfeiture order.

The court balanced the mitigating factors of the accused's youth, lack of prior record, remorse, and participation in counselling against the serious nature of the offences and the aggravating factor of reoffending while awaiting trial.

The accused, a pastor of a Spanish Pentecostal Church in London, Ontario, was charged with withholding material facts during border entry and attempting to aid and abet an undocumented individual to contravene immigration requirements.

The accused claimed duress, alleging that the hidden passenger threatened harm to his family in El Salvador if he did not smuggle him into Canada.

The court found the accused guilty on both counts, holding that the alleged threat of harm to the accused's parents lacked the temporal immediacy required for the duress defence and that the threat was too contingent and remote to constitute immediate harm.

The court also found the accused's account of events improbable and incredible.

Two defendants pleaded guilty to attempting to aid and abet a foreign national to misrepresent material facts under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act by providing her with a fraudulently used Canadian passport to attempt entry into Canada.

The defendants were detected at the border when the female passenger did not match the photograph in the passport presented.

The court imposed a fine of $5,000 on each defendant, rejecting the Crown's request for six months incarceration.

The court found the defendants fell into the less serious category of offenders, as their crime was motivated by humanitarian concerns rather than financial gain, and was ultimately easily detected.