Geoffrey Graham Hadfield

The defendant was found guilty of aggravated assault after trial.

The victim suffered a near-complete amputation of his hand when the defendant swung a machete at him during an altercation.

The defendant claimed self-defence, which was rejected by the court.

At sentencing, the court considered the defendant's difficult childhood, prior criminal record involving serious violent offences with weapons, the severity of the victim's injuries, and the lack of rehabilitation.

The court imposed a sentence of six years imprisonment, finding the case fell within the high end of the sentencing range for aggravated assault.

The defendant, Ryan Mackenzie, was found guilty by a jury of sexual assault.

This decision outlines the sentencing, considering statutory principles, mitigating and aggravating circumstances, and the significant victim impact.

The court accepted a joint submission from counsel, imposing a sentence of two years incarceration in a federal penitentiary, followed by two years of probation with specific conditions.

Additional orders included a non-communication order, weapon prohibitions, a Sex Offender Information Registration Act order, and a DNA sample order.

The accused, the principal of a salvage yard, was charged with 43 counts of possession of stolen property and three counts of fraud after police discovered numerous stolen vehicles and parts at his business and associated properties.

The Crown alleged the accused was operating a chop shop and knowingly dealing in stolen goods, while the accused claimed he was unaware the items were stolen and blamed employees and associates.

The court rejected the accused's explanations, finding overwhelming circumstantial evidence that he was deliberately running a stolen car and parts operation.

The accused was found guilty on 39 counts of possession of stolen property and two counts of fraud.

The appellant appealed his designation as a dangerous offender, arguing he should have been designated a long-term offender.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the sentencing judge did not err in concluding there was no reasonable possibility of successful treatment to control the risk the appellant posed in the community.

The Crown appealed the 30-month sentence (reduced to one day after pre-trial custody credit) imposed on the respondent for manslaughter.

The respondent had strangled the victim after discovering her in his home attempting a robbery and being attacked by her.

The Crown argued the sentence was unfit and outside the established range for manslaughter involving strangulation and disposal of a body.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the sentence was within the acceptable range given the unique circumstances, including the victim's unprovoked attacks, the respondent's lack of prior record, and the harsh conditions of his pre-trial custody.