Dean Embry

The accused brought an application for direction seeking a ruling that certain electronic communications exchanged between himself and the complainant over WhatsApp were not 'records' captured by s. 278.92 of the Criminal Code.

The communications involved social planning and discussions about drug use.

The court held that the communications did not contain personal information for which the complainant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the totality of the circumstances.

Therefore, the communications did not fall within the definition of 'record' under s. 278.1 and could be adduced at trial without a s. 278.92 hearing.

In a trial for impaired driving causing death, the defence brought a Charter application to exclude breathalyzer results, arguing the officer lacked reasonable suspicion to make an approved screening device demand.

The Crown sought to rely on the accused's statements at the crash scene to establish the officer's grounds.

The defence argued these statements were statutorily compelled under the Highway Traffic Act and inadmissible under section 7 of the Charter.

The court found the accused did not speak to police out of a sense of statutory compulsion, but rather to assist with the injured and manage his own situation.

The statements were ruled admissible on the voir dire.

The Crown applied for a ruling on the voluntariness of a statement made by the self-represented accused to a homicide investigator.

The accused, charged with the first-degree murder of his father, argued he lacked an operating mind during the interview due to mental health issues.

The court applied the Oickle and Whittle tests, finding that the accused understood what he was saying, knew he was speaking to a police officer, and appreciated the potential consequences.

The court concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that the statement was voluntary, not the result of threats, promises, or trickery, and ruled it admissible in its entirety.

The offender was convicted of conspiracy and attempting to import approximately 356 grams of cocaine from Costa Rica.

The Crown sought a three-year sentence, while the defence sought two years, noting the offender's impending deportation.

The court found the offender was a key participant in the scheme and had a prior record for drug trafficking.

The court determined a fit sentence was 35 months, but reduced it to two years less a day after applying credit for pre-sentence custody, strict house arrest, and the collateral consequence of certain deportation.

The accused was charged with conspiracy to import cocaine into Canada and attempting to import cocaine, arising from a scheme to ship packages from Costa Rica to Toronto through FedEx.

Intercepted communications demonstrated the accused’s involvement in coordinating shipments and arranging for a contact within FedEx to intercept packages before delivery.

The cocaine was discovered when two packages were intercepted in Panama, and documentary evidence from Panamanian authorities obtained under the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act was tendered to prove the contents of the packages.

The court held that the foreign investigative and laboratory records were admissible under s. 36 of the MLACMA and could be relied upon for their truth after assessing their reliability and corroboration with other evidence.

The court concluded that the packages contained approximately 355 grams of cocaine and that the accused was a participant in a conspiracy to import the drug into Canada.