43 total
Long-term offender designation and substantial concurrent penitentiary terms were imposed.
Following jury convictions for manslaughter, robbery, unlawful confinement, and use of an imitation firearm arising from a fatal robbery, the court determined a dangerous offender application under the pre-July 2, 2008 regime.
The court found the statutory prerequisites for both dangerous offender and long-term offender status were met but exercised discretion to designate the offender a long-term offender.
Emphasizing denunciation, deterrence, separation, and proportionality in light of extreme aggravating factors and no mitigating factors, the court imposed concurrent custodial terms resulting in a ten-year net sentence after enhanced pre-sentence custody credit, plus a ten-year long-term supervision order.
Police assault breached Charter but did not justify stay of conviction.
The applicant sought a stay of his convictions for armed robbery with a firearm and forcible confinement, arguing that police assaulted him during post‑arrest questioning in violation of ss. 7 and 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The Crown conceded that excessive force had been used by police officers during the interviews.
The court accepted that the assaults occurred but found the injuries were not serious, did not produce lasting harm, and had no impact on the fairness of the trial or the reliability of the verdict.
Applying the principles governing abuse of process and stays of proceedings, the court held that the stringent threshold for a stay was not met.
The appropriate remedy was instead a reduction in the sentence otherwise fit.
Directed verdict of acquittal granted as there was no evidence of constructive possession of cocaine.
The accused, Mechelle Rogers, was charged with possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking after police found 1.5 kg of cocaine in the trunk of a vehicle in which she was a passenger.
At the close of the Crown's case, she brought a motion for a directed verdict.
The court applied the test for a directed verdict based on circumstantial evidence and the law of constructive possession.
The court found that while there was evidence she knew illegal activity was taking place, there was no evidence she knew the substance was cocaine or had any control over it.
The motion was granted and a directed verdict of acquittal was entered.