D. Morlog

The offender, a 35-year-old first-time offender, was convicted by a jury of trafficking one ounce of fentanyl to an undercover officer.

Despite her recent rehabilitation efforts, the court found she lacked insight into the gravity of the offence and played a key role as a broker in the transaction.

Emphasizing the lethal nature of fentanyl and the need for denunciation and deterrence, the court rejected a conditional sentence and imposed a four-year penitentiary term.

The accused brought an application to adjourn his joint jury trial for drug importation, scheduled to commence in less than three weeks, in order to retain counsel of choice.

The accused had previously discharged counsel and had been warned multiple times that the trial would proceed with or without counsel.

The court dismissed the adjournment application, finding that the accused had not acted diligently or in a bona fide manner to retain available counsel, and that the application was a deliberate attempt to manipulate the system to achieve a de facto severance from his co-accused.

The Crown brought an application for directions regarding the procedure to review documents seized from the respondent's residence over which solicitor-client privilege was asserted.

The Crown proposed providing the respondent with a copy of the USB key containing the documents so she could identify privileged materials, while the defence argued for a third-party referee.

The court accepted the Crown's proposal, finding it sensible and protective of the respondent's rights as the privilege holder, and ordered the respondent to review the documents within 60 days.