F. Creed

The accused was charged with driving a motor vehicle carelessly contrary to Section 130 of the Highway Traffic Act.

The charge arose from a fatal collision on June 11, 2015, between the accused's vehicle and a mobility scooter operated by the deceased on a residential street in Blenheim.

The Crown's case relied on the assertion that the deceased was visible on the roadway for six seconds prior to impact and that the accused's failure to see or take evasive action demonstrated careless driving.

The Defence challenged the Crown's reconstruction evidence, particularly the assumption of an unobstructed view.

The Court found the accused not guilty, determining that the Crown had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

The accused brought a Charter application under s. 8 and s. 24(2) to exclude all evidence obtained from two search warrants executed on May 7, 2014.

The accused was charged with uttering threats to cause death, possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous to the public peace, and possession of prohibited weapons.

The court found that police officers conducting the search exceeded the scope of the warrant by searching in containers too small to hold a shotgun while looking for gun parts, thereby violating the accused's s. 8 rights.

The court also found that the officers improperly seized cell phones and medical information without reasonable grounds, and that misleading reports were filed with the justice.

Applying the Grant analysis, the court excluded all evidence obtained from the searches due to the serious and deliberate nature of the Charter breaches and the importance of maintaining judicial oversight through accurate reporting.

The accused pleaded guilty to impaired operation of a motor vehicle causing death contrary to section 255(3) of the Criminal Code.

On September 15, 2012, the accused, with a blood alcohol level of 129-134 millilitres per 100 millilitres of blood, failed to stop at a stop sign on Highway 40 in Chatham-Kent, causing his vehicle to break through a guardrail.

His passenger, a close friend, suffered severe head injuries and died.

The court imposed an 18-month custodial sentence followed by three years of probation, finding exceptional circumstances warranted a sentence below the typical range for such offences.

The accused brought a voir dire application to exclude evidence obtained from a search warrant executed at a motorcycle club clubhouse.

The accused challenged the validity of the telewarrant on multiple grounds, including failure to demonstrate impracticability of personal appearance, lack of full and frank disclosure, misleading statements, and insufficient grounds.

The court found that the Information to Obtain contained materially misleading and inaccurate statements, particularly regarding surveillance activities and complaints history.

The court determined that without the problematic paragraphs, insufficient grounds remained to justify the warrant's issuance.

Under the section 24(2) Charter analysis, the court excluded all evidence seized.