David P. Cole

The accused, Cody Joseph O’Dwyer, pleaded guilty to possession of a stolen motor vehicle, unauthorized possession of an unloaded revolver, being an occupant of a vehicle with a revolver, and possession of a weapon dangerous to the public peace.

The court considered the appropriate sentence, rejecting the Crown's inferences that the firearm was used to menace the victim or that Thunder Bay had an "epidemic" of gun violence, citing insufficient statistical evidence and the principle of sentencing based on actual conduct rather than potential harm.

The court also discussed the limited efficacy of general deterrence for offenders involved in drug and gun activities.

Ultimately, the court imposed a conditional sentence of 240 days (approximately 8 months) followed by 18 months of probation, with specific conditions, finding that a conditional sentence could adequately address the objective of denunciation given the circumstances.

The accused, R.G., was charged with sexual assault with a weapon and possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose against his spouse.

The trial judge found the complainant's evidence to be credible despite defence arguments regarding her memory issues stemming from a traumatic brain injury.

The defence's attempt to establish a motive to fabricate on the complainant's part, involving an alleged paramour, was rejected as contrived and self-serving.

The court found the accused guilty on both counts, emphasizing that the Crown's evidence was clear, powerful, and compelling.

A pre-sentence report was ordered, and uncharged sexual assault allegations were noted as potential aggravating factors for sentencing.

The accused was charged with escaping lawful custody, various firearm offences, and possession of cocaine.

The court excluded evidence of the accused's identity and the cocaine found, due to Charter breaches by police, specifically the failure to provide s. 10(a) and (b) rights immediately upon detention and the unreliable basis for arrest (purported "odour of marijuana").

However, evidence of discarded earbuds, which contained the accused's DNA and linked him to a loaded handgun found nearby, was admitted.

The court reasoned that the accused's flight and abandonment of the earbuds broke the chain of causation between the initial Charter breaches and the discovery of this evidence, and that there was no reasonable expectation of privacy in abandoned items.

Consequently, the accused was acquitted of escaping lawful custody and cocaine possession but found guilty of the firearm-related charges.

The judge also emphasized the critical need for updated police training on detention powers and Charter rights.

The offender pleaded guilty to four counts of sexual assault against four children, including his common-law partner's grandchildren, committed over a period spanning from 2003 to 2013.

The Crown sought designation as a long-term offender with ten years of community supervision.

The court imposed a global sentence of 4.5 years custody (with credit for pre-sentence custody resulting in 525 days remaining), followed by a 10-year Long-Term Supervision Order.

The court rejected the defence proposal for probation followed by potential preventative recognizance applications, finding that a more robust supervisory regime was necessary given the offender's 40-year history of sexual offending, his paraphilias, and the substantial risk of reoffending.

The accused was charged with four offences arising from a robbery at a mobile telephone store on Albion Road in Toronto on June 21, 2013: using an imitation firearm while committing robbery, robbery, conspiracy to commit robbery, and having his face masked during the commission of robbery.

The Crown's case relied on eyewitness testimony from the store employee, police observations at the scene, video evidence, and testimony from the accused's co-perpetrator who pleaded guilty.

The accused testified that he drove his co-perpetrator to the area to purchase a phone and marijuana, and that he was visiting a woman at her residence during the robbery.

The court rejected the accused's evidence and found him guilty on all four counts based on circumstantial evidence including the location of the vehicle, text messages between the accused and co-perpetrator, the false alibi, and physical evidence found in the vehicle.

The offender pleaded guilty to five counts of sexual misbehaviour involving two child victims and two counts of disobeying court orders.

The Crown sought a dangerous offender (determinate) designation or, alternatively, a long-term offender designation.

The court rejected the dangerous offender application but imposed a long-term offender designation.

The offender received a global custodial sentence of 1,725 days (approximately 4 years 9.5 months) following credit for guilty plea and pre-sentence custody, followed by a 7-year long-term supervision order.

The court considered the offender's prior sexual conviction, the pattern of abuse spanning multiple victims and years, and the psychological harm to the victims in determining sentence.

The accused, a former elementary school teacher and scoutmaster, pleaded guilty to multiple counts of indecent assault against seven young male scouts committed between 1966 and 1979.

The offences involved sexual touching, masturbation, and in one case oral sex, perpetrated during cottage trips and scout activities.

The accused had previously been convicted of similar offences in 1980 and sentenced to three months concurrent custody.

The sentencing hearing addressed systemic delays in the prosecution, the profound and lasting impacts on the victims, the offender's rehabilitation over 35 years without reoffending, and the appropriate balance between denunciation and restraint in sentencing.

The accused pleaded guilty to aggravated assault following a violent altercation in which he struck the victim multiple times with a homemade axe, causing compound fractures to both arms and multiple lacerations.

The sentencing judge imposed a custodial sentence of 33 months after considering the severity of injuries, the nature of the attack, the accused's criminal history including prior alcohol-related offences, and mitigating factors including family support and work history.

The court rejected the Crown's submission for 4 years and the defence submission for 18 months to 2 years less a day, finding that a penitentiary-length sentence was necessary to adequately denounce the offender's moral blameworthiness and address principles of deterrence.

A 12-year-old youth was arrested at school following the discovery of a firearm and ammunition in his backpack.

At the police station, he was subjected to a strip search conducted by Toronto Police Service officers.

The court found that the manner in which the strip search was conducted violated the youth's Charter rights under section 8 (protection against unreasonable search).

Specifically, the officers failed to follow mandated procedures requiring that a detainee not be left completely naked during the search process, as established in R. v. Golden.

The court found that the decision to order the strip search itself was not unconstitutional, but the manner of execution was.

Given a pattern of similar breaches by Toronto Police Service officers over the preceding decade and the lack of effective remedial response, the court granted a stay of proceedings as the appropriate remedy under section 24(1) of the Charter.

The Crown applied for a dangerous offender designation and indeterminate detention for the accused following guilty pleas to sexual assault causing bodily harm, choking with intent to commit an indictable offence, being masked with intent to commit an indictable offence, and unlawful confinement.

The accused had committed multiple serious sexual assaults against young women in Quebec and Ontario, as well as an attempted sexual assault in Florida.

The court found that the accused met the dangerous offender criteria under s.753 of the Criminal Code and that there was no reasonable possibility of eventual control of his risk in the community.

The court rejected the defence position that a long-term offender designation with a definite sentence followed by a long-term supervision order would be adequate, finding that the accused's personality disorder combined with sexual deviance, his lack of genuine insight into his problems, and his ambivalence toward treatment rendered community-based management insufficient to protect public safety.

The accused, a 37-year-old woman with a lengthy criminal record related to drug addiction, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to traffic 28.75 grams of crack cocaine.

The Crown sought a custodial sentence of approximately 15 months, while the defence sought a conditional sentence.

The court imposed an 18-month conditional sentence with the first six months subject to electronic monitoring, followed by two years of probation.

The decision reflects a modern approach to sentencing addict-traffickers, emphasizing genuine rehabilitation efforts and the possibility of community-based sentences where appropriate.