The appellant appealed his global sentence of eight years (less credit for pre-sentence custody) imposed for five offences related to human trafficking.
The appellant argued that the sentencing judge erred by: (1) failing to grant qualitative credit under R. v. Duncan for conditions of pre-sentence incarceration including triple bunking and lockdowns; (2) admitting and misusing voluntary videotaped jail-house interviews; and (3) imposing an excessive sentence.
The Court of Appeal dismissed all grounds of appeal, finding no error in the sentencing judge's discretionary decisions and confirming that the sentence was fit given the gravity of the offences and the appellant's degree of responsibility.
