Devin Harm

The court considered an application to exclude evidence in a prosecution for child luring, where the evidence was obtained from electronic devices seized from the accused’s residence.

The defence alleged breaches of sections 8 and 10(b) of the Charter, including improper use of an IP address without judicial authorization (in light of R. v. Bykovets), a search that exceeded the scope of the warrant, and delay/deficiencies in access to counsel.

The court found multiple Charter breaches, including a warrantless search for luring evidence and serious s. 10(b) violations.

Balancing the Grant factors, the court excluded the evidence and acquitted the accused.

Si-Qi Liang pleaded guilty to one count of possessing child pornography.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the quantity and explicit nature of the material, and mitigating factors such as his lack of a criminal record, guilty plea, remorse, and low risk of re-offending as assessed by a forensic psychiatrist.

The court emphasized the child-centered approach to sentencing in child pornography cases, prioritizing denunciation and deterrence.

A conditional sentence was deemed unfit.

Liang was sentenced to 9.5 months of incarceration, followed by 18 months of probation, a 20-year Sex Offender Information Registry Act (SOIRA) order, and a DNA order.

The court declined to impose broader Section 161 prohibition orders but imposed specific internet restrictions for three years.

The accused, Afrah Mohamed, was charged with unauthorized possession of a firearm and ammunition.

He brought a Charter application to exclude evidence, which was dismissed.

The central issue at trial was whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he was in constructive possession of the firearm and ammunition found during a search.

The court found that the Crown failed to prove constructive possession, as the evidence did not establish the accused's knowledge and control of the items beyond a reasonable doubt.

The accused was found not guilty.

Sheldon Livingston, a co-accused, brought a motion for severance from his co-accused, Yasmin Muzafary, to allow him to call her as a witness in support of his self-defence claim.

The court dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable possibility that the co-accused would testify if severed, or that her testimony would favorably affect the verdict, especially given the strong video evidence of a joint attack.

The court emphasized the strong presumption in favour of joint trials for co-accused acting in concert and the public interest in judicial efficiency.

The accused, B.W., faced charges of sexual assault.

At trial, the defence moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, arguing B.W. was a young person at the time of the alleged offences (1993-1994) and thus should be tried under the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

The Crown contended the Superior Court had jurisdiction, citing uncertainty regarding B.W.'s age and provisions of the YCJA.

The court found the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that B.W. was 18 or older at the time of the offences, quashing the indictment for lack of jurisdiction.

This is a sentencing decision for Jonathan Wong, who pleaded guilty to three counts of voyeurism under s. 162.1(a) of the Criminal Code.

His conduct involved surreptitiously recording 174 unidentified persons, 7 identified victims, and one victim during sexual activity, over a period of 20 years (2001-2021).

The collection of voyeuristic files was described as the largest in Canadian history.

The Crown sought 18 months imprisonment for the general voyeurism counts and a consecutive 3 months for the sexual activity recording.

The defence sought a conditional sentence or 12 months imprisonment.

The court emphasized denunciation and deterrence, finding that a conditional sentence would be inadequate given the gravity, duration, and volume of the offences, and the significant impact on victims.

The judge imposed a total sentence of 18 months imprisonment, with the 3-month sentence for the sexual activity recording to be served concurrently, followed by 18 months probation.

The Crown applied for testimonial aids for a key witness in a second-degree murder trial.

The witness, who suffers from schizophrenia and other mental health conditions, witnessed the stabbing.

The Crown sought to admit the witness's videotaped police interview under s. 715.2 of the Criminal Code and to allow him to testify via CCTV under s. 486.2.

The court dismissed the s. 715.2 application, finding the witness capable of communicating his evidence cogently.

However, the court granted the s. 486.2 application, allowing the witness to testify via CCTV, as his mental disability and anxiety could make it difficult for him to give a full and candid account in the accused's presence.

The applicant sought certiorari to quash an order committing him to stand trial for second-degree murder.

The applicant argued that the preliminary hearing judge exceeded her jurisdiction by failing to consider exculpatory evidence regarding the mens rea element of the offence.

The reviewing court found that the preliminary hearing judge properly considered the totality of the evidence, including the exculpatory statement, and correctly applied the test for committal based on circumstantial evidence of mens rea derived from surveillance video.

The application for certiorari was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to stand trial.