Scott Evenden

The applicant pled guilty to the production of marijuana and theft of electricity after police discovered a large-scale grow operation with a hydro bypass in a residential home.

The Crown sought a mandatory minimum sentence of three years under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

The applicant brought a constitutional challenge arguing the mandatory minimums violated s. 12 of the Charter.

The court found that the mandatory minimum sentences could foreseeably capture conduct with minimal moral blameworthiness, such as a licensed producer making an honest mistake about the number of plants, or a gardener unaware of a public safety hazard.

The court declared the mandatory minimum sentences under ss. 7(2)(b)(i)(ii) and 7(3)(c) of no force or effect.

The accused was charged with arson with disregard for human life and arson for a fraudulent purpose following an explosion and fire that destroyed a restaurant.

The Crown's case relied heavily on the testimony of an unsavoury witness who claimed the accused confessed to setting the fire, as well as expert evidence regarding the fire's origin.

The court applied a Vetrovec warning to the witness's testimony and found it unreliable without sufficient corroboration.

The expert evidence was deemed equivocal.

The court found the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused caused the fire, resulting in acquittals on both counts.