Officer Canepa

Joseph Andrews was found guilty after trial of five drug trafficking offences involving cocaine, marijuana, and psilocybin, with a total street value between $32,800 and $39,300.

The Crown sought a five-year penitentiary term, while the defence requested a maximum reformatory sentence of two years less a day, emphasizing the offender's rehabilitation and family ties.

The court, applying sentencing principles of denunciation and deterrence, found the offender was a multi-ounce level drug dealer, not merely a courier.

Considering aggravating factors (large quantities, financial gain) and mitigating factors (dated record, strong family support, rehabilitation prospects, onerous pre-trial release conditions), the court imposed a four-year prison sentence, along with a ten-year weapons prohibition, forfeiture of drugs, paraphernalia, and proceeds of crime, and a DNA order.

Joseph Andrews was charged with possession of cocaine, marijuana, and psilocybin for the purpose of trafficking.

He brought a Charter application to exclude evidence seized under search warrants, alleging violations of ss. 8, 10(a), and 10(b).

The court dismissed the Charter application, finding the search warrants valid and any other breaches minor and not warranting exclusion.

Following the Charter application, the trial proceeded, and the court found Andrews guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on all counts based on circumstantial evidence of knowledge and control of the drugs found in his truck and a storage unit.

The offender was found guilty of possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, assault police, and possession of proceeds of crime.

The Crown sought an upper reformatory sentence of incarceration, while the offender sought a conditional sentence.

The court considered the offender's difficult background, genuine remorse, and 51 months of crime-free behavior while on bail.

The court imposed a conditional sentence of two years less a day, followed by two years of probation, along with a DNA order and a lifetime weapons prohibition.

The accused was charged with drug trafficking, proceeds of crime, and firearms offences after police executed a search warrant at a residence suspected to be a stash house.

The accused conceded guilt on the drug trafficking and proceeds of crime charges.

The central issue at trial was whether the accused had constructive possession of a loaded firearm found in a hall closet.

The court found that the circumstantial evidence, including the accused's use of the residence to store drugs and his frequent visits, was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had knowledge and control of the firearm, as other individuals also had access to the residence.

The appellant appealed his conviction for possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking, which occurred while he was an inmate at a jail.

The trial judge had convicted the appellant by rejecting his testimony and the exculpatory evidence of a correctional officer, while accepting the evidence of another officer.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge made several errors in assessing credibility, including misapprehending the record regarding the officer's use of notes, improperly using the appellant's failure to plead guilty to a separate charge, and misapplying expert testimony regarding the value of drugs in jail.

The appeal was allowed, the conviction set aside, and a new trial ordered.