23 total
The court committed three accused to stand trial for drug importation and conspiracy based on circumstantial and digital evidence.
This is a preliminary inquiry decision concerning three accused charged with unlawfully importing cocaine into Canada contrary to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.
The Crown sought to commit all three accused as parties to the importation offence and/or of conspiring to import cocaine.
The evidence established that a young woman was provided with a free trip to Jamaica, where she was instructed to return with a suitcase containing over 1.4 kilograms of cocaine.
The court applied the test for preliminary inquiries, examining whether there was sufficient evidence upon which a reasonable jury could return a verdict of guilty.
The decision addresses the roles of each accused in facilitating the importation scheme, the doctrine of innocent agents, and the elements of conspiracy.
The court found sufficient evidence to commit four accused to stand trial for armed robbery and kidnapping.
At a preliminary inquiry, the Crown sought to establish sufficient evidence to commit four accused persons to trial for armed home invasion robbery, kidnapping with intent to hold for ransom, and related offences.
The evidence included direct testimony from the complainant, extensive video surveillance from the complainant's home security system, CTV news helicopter footage of the police takedown, and mall security video.
The court found sufficient evidence upon which a properly instructed trier of fact could reasonably find guilt on charges of armed robbery, kidnapping with use of firearms, masked commission of indictable offences, and escape from lawful custody.
All four accused were committed to stand trial in Superior Court before a judge and jury.
Police entry into an open garage to investigate an impaired driver does not violate section 8 of the Charter.
The accused was charged with driving while impaired and driving with a blood alcohol level over 80 mg per 100 ml.
The Crown alleged the accused drove to a liquor store while already intoxicated, purchased vodka, and was observed by LCBO employees exhibiting signs of impairment before nearly causing an accident.
The accused contended he consumed alcohol only after arriving home and before police arrived.
The court rejected the accused's evidence as lacking credibility and not raising reasonable doubt.
The court also dismissed Charter applications regarding alleged violations of section 8 (unreasonable search) and section 10(b) (right to counsel) rights.
The accused was found guilty on both charges.