Jason Skinner

The accused pleaded guilty to possession of a loaded prohibited firearm with readily accessible ammunition contrary to section 95(2) of the Criminal Code.

Police executed a search warrant at his residence and discovered a loaded sawed-off shotgun with the hammer cocked in the firing position and no safety mechanism, along with additional shotgun shells.

The court rejected the defence submission for credit for time spent on bail, finding insufficient evidence of hardship or punitive conditions.

The court imposed a sentence of three years in custody, characterizing the conduct as a "true crime" under the framework established in R v. Nur, emphasizing denunciation, deterrence, and public protection.

The accused was convicted of possessing hydromorphone and oxycodone for the purpose of trafficking, and simple possession of ecstasy.

The Crown sought a two-year penitentiary sentence while the defence sought twelve months.

The court imposed a twenty-two month sentence for the hydromorphone trafficking count, concurrent fourteen-month sentence for oxycodone trafficking, and concurrent forty-five day sentence for ecstasy possession.

The court applied Gladue principles while recognizing that heroin and its equivalents attract penitentiary sentences absent exceptional circumstances.

The court balanced the serious nature of the offence against the offender's rehabilitation prospects and aboriginal ancestry.

The accused was charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle and driving with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding 80 milligrams in 100 millilitres of blood following a motor vehicle collision on Wharncliffe Road North in London, Ontario.

The Crown's case relied on breath sample results and observations of the accused's behaviour at the scene and at the police station.

The court found that the Crown failed to establish the timing prerequisites necessary to rely on the statutory presumptions of accuracy and identity under the Criminal Code, and therefore dismissed the over .80 count.

On the impairment count, the court found the evidence insufficient to establish impairment beyond a reasonable doubt, noting inconsistencies in witness accounts, the accused's apparent ability to understand instructions, and the plausible explanation of weather and road conditions for the collision.

The accused was acquitted on both counts.

The accused pleaded guilty to wilfully damaging a van belonging to Bell Media Inc. and being a member of an unlawful assembly during an alcohol-fuelled riot near Fanshawe College in London, Ontario.

The Crown sought a jail sentence of three to six months followed by probation with community service.

The defence argued for a conditional sentence order.

The court imposed an 8-month conditional sentence order with strict terms including house arrest for the first five months, abstinence from alcohol and non-prescription drugs, 50 hours of community service, and mandatory counselling, followed by a 15-month probation order with additional conditions.