Kristine McLane

Brittney Hawboldt pleaded guilty to multiple offences including reckless discharge of a prohibited firearm, possession of a restricted firearm, dangerous operation of a motor vehicle, and various breaches of release orders.

The court considered aggravating factors such as the serious nature of the firearm and driving offences in a public place, and mitigating factors including her guilty plea, remorse, difficult childhood, and rehabilitative efforts.

The Crown sought a global sentence of six years.

The court imposed a global sentence of six years, granting significant credit for pre-sentence custody under harsh conditions and for time spent under stringent bail conditions, resulting in a balance of three years and one month remaining to be served.

Ancillary orders included a lifetime weapons prohibition, DNA order, and a 10-year driving prohibition, while declining restitution and victim fine surcharge.

The accused, Estime Ndayihezagiye, was charged with five firearms-related offences after a search warrant executed on his residence located a restricted semi-automatic handgun and ammunition in a Gucci satchel hanging on his bedroom door.

The prosecution relied on constructive possession, arguing the accused had knowledge and control of the items.

The defence proposed two alternative inferences: that a parent planted the satchel or that it belonged solely to his 12-year-old brother.

The court dismissed both alternative inferences as speculative or unreasonable, finding that the accused, an 18-year-old adult, had knowledge and control of the sophisticated weapon and its accessories given its location and the circumstances.

The accused was found guilty on all five counts.

The accused, Suhail Alsendi, faced charges of possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose and carrying a concealed weapon.

The trial included a blended voir dire concerning alleged Charter rights violations (ss. 9 and 10(b)).

The court found that the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused knew the BB gun was a weapon or firearm, or that he intended to use it in a dangerous manner, or that he intended to conceal it.

Consequently, the accused was acquitted on both charges, rendering the Charter remedy discussion moot.

Kevin Hanse was charged with firearm and ammunition offenses, with the Crown's case relying heavily on wiretap interceptions using alleged code words like "car" "whip" "gas" and "snub." The defence sought to introduce internet search results from "weedmaps.com" and "wikileaf.com" through an articling student to suggest that "snub" and "gas" were slang terms for marijuana, thereby challenging the Crown's interpretation.

The court conducted a voir dire and ruled the internet evidence inadmissible.

The judge found that the evidence did not meet the strict criteria for judicial notice of adjudicative facts, as the sources lacked indisputable accuracy and the facts were not notorious or generally accepted slang for marijuana.

The court emphasized the need for accuracy and reliability in evidence presented to a jury, rejecting the argument that trial fairness or cost considerations should relax the evidentiary standards for adjudicative facts.