Jamie Guggisberg

The defendant, a 47-year-old man with a previously clean record, was sentenced for trafficking in fentanyl patches.

Following a workplace electrocution eight years prior, the defendant was lawfully prescribed fentanyl for pain management.

He became addicted to the drug, abused his prescription by chewing used patches, and gave patches to his brother-in-law who was experiencing severe back pain.

To cover his tracks, he fabricated fake used patches.

The defendant pleaded guilty to trafficking.

The Crown sought a penitentiary sentence of three to four years.

The court imposed a suspended sentence with three years of probation, 100 hours of community service, and various conditions including substance abuse counselling and a weapons prohibition.

The accused pleaded guilty to impaired driving and failing to provide a breath sample.

The Crown filed a Notice of Application for Increased Penalty, which would have mandated a minimum four-month custodial sentence.

The court considered whether the Crown's exercise of discretion in filing the Notice violated Section 7 of the Charter by failing to properly consider Gladue principles applicable to Aboriginal offenders.

The court found that the Crown's decision to file the Notice before receiving the Gladue report constituted a violation of Section 7 of the Charter, as it did not demonstrate proper consideration of the offender's unique circumstances as an Aboriginal person.

The Notice was set aside.

The court imposed a 12-month conditional sentence with strict conditions, including a curfew, substance abuse treatment, and participation in rehabilitative programming, along with a 12-month probation order and a three-year driving prohibition.

The accused was charged with sexually assaulting his step-daughter while she was sleeping by the fireplace.

The accused denied the allegations, claiming he was merely stoking the fire and had not touched her.

The court applied the W.(D.) framework to assess credibility, finding the complainant's evidence credible and the accused's explanations untruthful and inconsistent with the testimony of other witnesses.

The accused was found guilty of sexual assault.