Gavin Holder

This is a youth sentencing decision for a young person, R.R., who pleaded guilty to aggravated assault and robbery while using a firearm.

The offences involved two carjackings, the abduction and shooting of one victim, and the brandishing of a firearm in a second incident.

The court considered significant aggravating factors, including the gravity of the offences, R.R.'s prior youth record involving firearms, and his being on probation and a firearms prohibition at the time.

Mitigating factors included the guilty plea, pre-trial custody (441 days, including during the COVID-19 pandemic), educational courses taken in detention, strong family support, and expressed remorse.

The court addressed the issue of enhanced credit for pre-trial custody in the youth context, noting differences from adult sentencing.

The judge emphasized specific deterrence and public protection, finding that R.R. posed a high risk to public safety despite family support.

A further custodial sentence was deemed necessary for rehabilitation and reintegration.

The defendant, charged with possession of cocaine and heroin mixed with Fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking, brought a Charter application to exclude evidence.

The court found that the arresting officer lacked credible grounds for the vehicle search, leading to a breach of the defendant's section 8 Charter rights.

Additionally, the defendant's section 10(b) right to counsel was breached due to a significant delay in facilitating access to a lawyer and the officer's repeated elicitation of incriminating information after the right was invoked.

Applying the R. v. Grant test, the court concluded that all physical evidence (drugs) and utterances made by the defendant should be excluded from the trial.

The applicant, charged with first-degree murder and firearms offences following the shooting death of his girlfriend and his own attempted suicide, applied for bail.

The applicant had a history of breaching bail conditions, including no-contact orders with the deceased.

Due to his severe medical condition resulting from the suicide attempt, primary and secondary ground concerns were somewhat mitigated, though the proposed sureties were deemed unsuitable.

The court denied bail primarily on the tertiary grounds, finding that the Crown's case was overwhelming, the offences were grave, and the applicant's history of non-compliance with court orders meant his release would shake public confidence in the administration of justice.

The offender was convicted of multiple firearms offences, including possession of a loaded restricted firearm with a defaced serial number hidden in his vehicle, and breaching a weapons prohibition order.

The Crown sought a global sentence of 6.5 years, arguing the offence was at the 'true crime' end of the spectrum.

The court disagreed, finding no evidence the firearm was possessed for drug trafficking, and imposed a global sentence of 4.5 years.

The court granted enhanced pre-sentence credit for harsh lockdown conditions at the Toronto South Detention Centre, resulting in a sentence of time served.

The offender's vehicle was ordered forfeited as offence-related property.

The applicant brought a motion under section 8 of the Charter to exclude evidence (a firearm) found in his vehicle, arguing that the initial warrantless seizure of the vehicle and the subsequent search warrant were unlawful.

The court found that the investigating officer had reasonable and probable grounds to seize the vehicle without a warrant under section 489(2) of the Criminal Code, as it matched the description of a vehicle involved in a recent shooting and was believed to contain trace evidence.

Alternatively, the seizure was lawful under the Highway Traffic Act due to improper license plates.

The court also dismissed the applicant's Garofoli challenge, finding that despite some minor errors and omissions in the Information to Obtain (ITO), the issuing justice could still have granted the search warrant.

The application was dismissed.

The accused was charged with attempted murder and various firearms offences following a drive-by shooting.

The firearm used in the shooting was later found hidden in the dashboard of the accused's vehicle.

The Crown's case was circumstantial, relying on the accused's ownership of the vehicle, his use of the vehicle around the time of the shooting, and a fabricated report to police that the vehicle had been stolen.

The court found the accused guilty of the firearms possession charges, concluding he had constructive possession and knowledge of the firearm hidden in his vehicle.

However, the court acquitted the accused of the attempted murder charges, finding a reasonable inference that someone else may have been driving the vehicle at the time of the shooting.

Trevon Williams was found guilty of unlawful possession of a loaded firearm, breach of probation, and breach of a weapons prohibition order.

The court considered aggravating factors including the possession of a concealed, loaded handgun in public (including a high school), a prior criminal history involving violence, and the fact that the offender was on probation and subject to weapons prohibition orders at the time of the offences.

Mitigating factors included the offender's youth (18 at the time of the offences) and the efficient conduct of the trial by the defence.

The court also considered the offender's cultural background as an African Canadian and individual of Aboriginal ancestry, noting the lack of a Gladue report but acknowledging the systemic issues.

The defence sought a sentence of time served, while the Crown sought a 6-year penitentiary sentence.

The court imposed a global sentence of 4.5 years, consisting of 4 years for firearm possession (including 34.5 months presentence custody credit), 6 months consecutive for breach of weapons prohibition, and 3 months concurrent for breach of probation.

The court also ordered forfeiture of the firearm and ammunition, lifetime weapons prohibition orders, and a DNA order.

The offenders, Romario Brissett and Devar Francis, were convicted by a jury of living off the avails of juvenile prostitution and exercising control over a minor for prostitution.

The Crown sought sentences of 2.5 years concurrent with 5 years for both.

The offenders sought 5 months consecutive or time served.

The court rejected the application of new mandatory minimums not in effect at the time of the offence and declined to apply the reasoning from R. v. Jackson regarding systemic racism for African-Canadian offenders due to lack of direct connection to the offenders' circumstances.

The court also rejected the argument for reduced sentences based on immigration consequences, finding the proposed sentences disproportionate.

Romario Brissett was sentenced to four years' incarceration, and Devar Francis was sentenced to three years' incarceration, with credit for pre-sentence custody.