D. Sarikaya

The United States sought the extradition of three respondents for their alleged participation in a scheme to defraud a major technology company's retail stores by manipulating point-of-sale devices.

One respondent consented to committal.

The remaining two respondents argued there was insufficient evidence of their identity and participation to justify committal.

Applying the test under section 29(1) of the Extradition Act and the standard from Ferras, the court found that a reasonable jury, properly instructed, could find both respondents guilty based on the certified record of the case, which included video surveillance, co-conspirator evidence, and loss prevention testimony.

Committal for surrender was ordered for all respondents.

Sentencing decision following guilty pleas to three counts of breaking and entering a dwelling house and committing theft, possession of stolen property under $5000, and public mischief.

The offences involved multiple residential break-ins, including one committed while the offender was bound by recognizance and probation conditions and where the dwelling was occupied at the time.

The court emphasized the serious violation of the sanctity of the home and the aggravating factor under s. 348.1 of the Criminal Code when a dwelling is occupied.

Balancing denunciation and deterrence with mitigating factors including lack of prior record, remorse, and supportive family circumstances, the court imposed a custodial sentence.

The offender received concurrent nine‑month custodial terms followed by probation with strict conditions.