Jane E. Kelly

The court found Davy Hernandez Balan guilty of first degree murder in the death of Maxim Karyakin.

The main issue was whether Mr. Balan, who has a history of schizophrenia and previous findings of not criminally responsible due to mental disorder (NCR-MD), was criminally responsible for the killing.

The court accepted that Mr. Balan suffered from schizophrenia but was not satisfied that the mental disorder rendered him incapable of knowing his act was morally wrong.

The court found that the murder was planned and deliberate, and that Mr. Balan had the requisite intent for murder.

The court sentenced Ciro Garofano to life imprisonment with 18 years of parole ineligibility for second-degree murder, and concurrent 10-year sentences for two counts of aggravated assault.

The decision details the circumstances of the offences, the impact on the victims and their families, and the aggravating and mitigating factors considered.

The court reviewed the statutory framework for parole ineligibility, relevant case law, and the fit sentence in light of the facts and sentencing principles.

The court sentenced Pal Pintyi for manslaughter in the death of his brother-in-law, Robert Racz.

The trial judge considered the turbulent relationship between the men, the history of threats and violence, and the provocation by the deceased.

The Crown sought eight years’ imprisonment; the defence sought five.

The court imposed a sentence of five years plus one day (time served), taking into account harsh pre-sentence custody conditions, provocation, and mitigating factors such as Pintyi’s background, remorse, and prospects for rehabilitation.

Ancillary orders included a lifetime weapons prohibition and a DNA order.

The court found Pal Pintyi guilty of manslaughter, not murder, in the death of his brother-in-law, Robert Racz.

The decision turned on whether the Crown had proven the intent required for murder beyond a reasonable doubt.

The court accepted that Pintyi acted out of fear and anger after years of abuse and threats from Racz, culminating in a confrontation where Pintyi struck Racz with a steel pipe and kicked him.

The evidence did not establish the necessary intent for murder, and the court found a reasonable inference that Pintyi acted impulsively in response to provocation.

The partial defence of provocation was not considered necessary, as the intent for murder was not proven.

Ricardo Gomez, a Toronto Police Service officer, pleaded guilty to breach of trust for providing confidential information to a member of the public.

The court imposed a six-month conditional sentence, declining probation or a discharge.

The decision details the facts, Gomez’s background, letters of support, and the legal framework for sentencing, including aggravating and mitigating factors.

The court emphasized the seriousness of breach of trust by police officers and the need for denunciation and deterrence, finding a discharge contrary to the public interest.

The court sentenced Jordan James O’Brien-Tobin to life imprisonment with 18 years of parole ineligibility for the second degree murder of Gabriel Magalhaes, a 16-year-old stranger, at a Toronto subway station.

The decision details the aggravating and mitigating factors, including the random and brutal nature of the offence, the devastating impact on the victim’s family and community, the offender’s extensive criminal record, and his personal and mental health background.

The court found that the protection of society, denunciation, and deterrence required a period of parole ineligibility above the statutory minimum.

The court acquitted Nicol Oliver White of sexual assault, finding that the Crown had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the complainant, Z.E., did not consent to the sexual activity in question.

The decision turned on the credibility and reliability of the evidence provided by both the complainant and the accused, as well as corroborating evidence from a third party witness.

The court found material inconsistencies in the complainant’s evidence and accepted the accused’s version of events as raising a reasonable doubt.

The court sentenced Tahir Ul-Haq for trafficking fentanyl, after he sold what he believed to be cocaine to a friend, resulting in one death and one serious injury.

The court found that Mr. Ul-Haq was not a commercial trafficker, did not know the substance was fentanyl, and sold it as a favour without profit.

The sentence imposed was a conditional sentence of two years less a day, followed by probation, with ancillary orders.

The decision carefully weighs aggravating and mitigating factors, including the tragic consequences, Mr. Ul-Haq’s personal circumstances, and the collateral immigration consequences of conviction.

The court sentenced Lance Burkhard for second-degree murder following a guilty plea after a successful appeal of his first-degree murder conviction.

The decision details the facts of the offence, the aggravating and mitigating factors, the character and rehabilitation of the offender, and the impact on the victim’s family.

The court imposed a life sentence with 12 years of parole ineligibility, considering the seriousness of the offence, Burkhard’s criminal record, his rehabilitation efforts, and the harsh conditions of pre-sentence custody, including during the COVID-19 pandemic.

O'Shane Mitchell pleaded guilty to three counts of reckless discharge of a firearm and one count of possession of a loaded firearm.

The charges arose from a shooting incident where Mitchell, acting in self-defence against one aggressor who died, recklessly injured three other individuals.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the use of a loaded firearm in an enclosed space, injuries to multiple victims, and the unrecovered firearm.

Mitigating factors included Mitchell's youth, difficult upbringing in a violent, racialized community, early guilty plea, remorse, and harsh pre-sentence custody conditions (lockdowns, triple-bunking).

The court also considered the impact of anti-Black racism on the offender's background.

The judge imposed a global sentence of six years' imprisonment, reduced from an initial inclination of seven years due to the harsh pre-sentence custody conditions.

With credit for 735 days (enhanced to 3 years), Mitchell was sentenced to serve a further three years.

Ancillary orders included a lifetime firearms prohibition, a DNA order, and a no-contact order.

The accused, Norbert Budai, was charged with first-degree murder in the death of his estranged wife, Henrietta Viski, who died after being doused with gasoline and set on fire.

Budai pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder but guilty to second-degree murder, which the Crown did not accept.

The court, sitting without a jury, found that the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the murder was planned and deliberate, rejecting the defence's argument that Budai's consumption of alcohol and fentanyl limited his capacity to plan and deliberate.

Budai was found guilty of first-degree murder.

Fazal Zaban was convicted of manslaughter after being acquitted of first-degree murder in the shooting death of Dung Le during a drug and firearms deal.

The court considered aggravating factors, including Zaban's extensive criminal record involving violence and firearms, the use of a prohibited firearm in a public place, and his failure to be deterred by previous sentences.

Mitigating factors included his supportive family, efforts at rehabilitation while incarcerated (obtaining a high school diploma, taking courses), and the exceptionally harsh conditions of his pre-sentence custody, including prolonged lockdowns and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Crown sought a sentence of 15 years to life, while the defence sought 10 to 12 years.

The court imposed a sentence of 13 years' imprisonment, reduced from an initial assessment of 15 years due to the harsh pre-sentence custody conditions.

Zaban received credit for 7 years served, leaving 6 years remaining.

Mandatory lifetime weapons prohibition and DNA orders were also imposed.

The accused was charged with second-degree murder and interfering with a body.

The court found that while the accused appreciated the nature and quality of his acts and knew they were legally wrong, his schizophrenia rendered him incapable of knowing his conduct was morally wrong.

Based on expert psychiatric opinions and other evidence, the court concluded that the accused met the burden of proof for the Not Criminally Responsible by reason of mental disorder (NCR-MD) defence under s. 16(1) of the Criminal Code.

The accused, Cindy Ali, was charged with first-degree murder in the death of her daughter.

Following a successful appeal of a prior conviction, she proceeded to a new trial without a jury.

The Crown alleged she smothered her daughter, either as a planned act (mercy killing), an impulsive act (second-degree murder), or through criminal negligence by failing to provide necessaries of life (manslaughter) during a staged home invasion.

The defence maintained her innocence, asserting a genuine home invasion by intruders or an accidental death due to seizure/aspiration.

The court found reasonable doubt regarding the accused's culpability, noting that both the defence's home invasion account and the Crown's staging theory were equally consistent with the evidence.

The accused was acquitted of all charges.

Mr. Gidharry was sentenced for attempted murder after attacking his plant manager with samurai swords, causing significant physical and emotional injuries.

He had also pleaded guilty to aggravated assault and carrying concealed weapons, which were conditionally stayed.

The court considered aggravating factors including premeditation, use of deadly weapons, and severe victim impact, and mitigating factors such as no prior criminal record, employment, family support, and harsh pre-sentence custody conditions due to the pandemic.

The court imposed a sentence of 17 years' imprisonment, reduced to 12 years and 9 months after credit for pre-sentence custody.

This case concerns a criminal trial where the accused, Eden Gidharry, pleaded guilty to aggravated assault and carrying concealed weapons but not guilty to attempted murder.

The court, sitting without a jury, assessed whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused intended to kill the victim during a violent attack with samurai swords.

The court considered the premeditated nature of the attack, the target, the severity and location of the victim's injuries, and the accused's utterances, ultimately concluding that the intent to murder was established.

M.E.D. was convicted of multiple sexual violence offences, including human trafficking, receiving financial benefit from sexual services, procuring, advertising sexual services, and sexual assault, committed between August 2016 and January 2017.

The Crown sought an eight-year global sentence, while the defence proposed five years.

The court considered aggravating factors such as the profound victim impact, profit motive, victim's attempts to escape, and the sexual assault.

Mitigating factors included the offender's age, difficult upbringing, mental health issues, family support, minimal criminal record, and the harsh conditions of pre-sentence custody and bail, as well as the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on incarceration.

The court imposed a global sentence of six years imprisonment, with credit for pre-sentence custody, resulting in five years and nine months remaining to serve, along with various ancillary orders including a $10,000 restitution order.

Zaid Mohammed was found guilty of aggravated assault following a plea and appeared for sentencing.

The Crown sought five years (60 months) in custody, while the defence sought 30 to 36 months.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the premeditated, armed, and violent nature of the attack, the severe and permanent injuries to the victim (loss of sight in one eye), and the offender's criminal record.

Mitigating factors included the offender's youth, family support, guilty plea, participation in rehabilitation programs while incarcerated, and the provocation related to the theft of his dog.

The court imposed a global sentence of 40 months' imprisonment.

After applying credit for pre-sentence custody (Summers credit), harsh lockdown conditions (Duncan credit), and stringent bail conditions (Downes credit), a total of 18 months and 10 days of credit was granted, leaving a remaining sentence of 21 months and 21 days to be served.

Ancillary orders for a mandatory DNA sample and a 10-year weapons prohibition were also imposed.

Ginye Clarke pleaded guilty to multiple offences including robbery with a firearm, breach of recognizance, and various firearm possession charges.

The court considered aggravating and mitigating factors, including the harsh conditions of pre-sentence custody at the Toronto South Detention Centre and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Crown sought a global sentence of 6 to 8 years, while the defence sought 5 years.

The court imposed a global sentence of 5 years (60 months), applying 27 months of Summers credit and an additional 10 months of Duncan credit for harsh pre-sentence custody conditions, resulting in a further 23 months to be served.

Ancillary orders for DNA, firearm forfeiture, and a lifetime weapons prohibition were also imposed, along with 12 months of probation.

Allan Rajmoolie pleaded guilty to possessing a restricted firearm with readily accessible ammunition, possessing a firearm while prohibited, and breaching recognizance.

The Crown sought a global sentence of 4 to 4.5 years, while the defence sought 3.5 years.

The court imposed a global sentence of 4 years (48 months), less 25 months for time served, resulting in a further 23 months to be served.

The court denied additional credit for harsh conditions of incarceration (Duncan credit), finding no adverse effect on the offender.

Ancillary orders for DNA sample and a lifetime firearm prohibition were also imposed.