Jeff Manishen

The court sentenced Jeremy Wicker for sexual assault against his former spouse, Josephine Wicker, following a conviction after trial.

The Crown sought a two-year jail sentence and three years' probation, while the defence argued for a conditional sentence.

The court reviewed relevant case law, considered aggravating and mitigating factors, and ultimately imposed a custodial sentence with probation, declining to make a SOIRA order.

The decision discusses the impact of domestic context, lack of remorse, and the principles of denunciation and deterrence.

Margaret Park-Romain pleaded guilty to dangerous driving causing death.

The court considered victim impact statements, the offender's background, and sentencing principles, including the disparity between sentences for dangerous driving causing death and impaired driving causing death.

The judge emphasized general deterrence and denunciation, imposing a three-year penitentiary sentence and a five-year driving prohibition, plus the period of imprisonment.

The defendant, S.L., was found guilty of possessing child pornography.

Prior to sentencing, S.L. challenged the constitutionality of the mandatory minimum sentence for the offence.

The parties jointly submitted a conditional sentence of 10 months imprisonment.

The court found the mandatory minimum sentence violated s. 12 of the Charter, relying on R. v. John.

Considering the extreme nature of the child pornography, the defendant's first-offender status, low risk of re-offending, and severe medical condition (terminal cancer), the court acceded to the joint submission, imposing a 10-month conditional sentence with strict conditions, including house arrest, curfew, internet prohibitions, and ancillary orders like DNA submission and Sex Offender Registration.

The defendant was charged with failure or refusal to comply with a breath demand under section 254(5) of the Criminal Code.

The Crown alleged that a police officer lawfully demanded a breath sample into an approved screening device (ASD), which the defendant refused.

The defendant argued that the demand was invalid because the officer lacked reasonable suspicion that he had alcohol in his body, and alternatively, that the demand was not made "forthwith" as required by statute.

The court found that on the totality of the circumstances, the officer objectively lacked the requisite reasonable suspicion, and alternatively, that the Crown failed to establish the demand was made forthwith.

The defendant was acquitted.

The defendant was charged with refusing to comply with a breath demand, failing to provide assistance, and failing to exhibit required navigation lights under the Canada Shipping Act.

The defendant brought a Charter application alleging violations of sections 7, 8, 9, and 10(b) of the Charter.

The court found that the defendant's rights under sections 9 and 10(b) were violated.

The defendant was arrested for a Canada Shipping Act violation and placed in handcuffs without justification.

The officer then questioned the defendant about alcohol consumption prior to providing the right to counsel, which was found to be a breach of section 10(b) rights.

The court excluded all evidence obtained in violation of these Charter rights under section 24(2).

The accused was convicted after trial of accessing, possessing, making, and making available child pornography.

The sentencing decision addresses the gravity of offences involving child sexual abuse material, including 125 images and 3 videos found on the accused's devices, as well as sadistic and depraved chat logs depicting discussions of violent sexual abuse of children.

The court imposed a global sentence of four years imprisonment, emphasizing denunciation and deterrence as paramount sentencing principles for child pornography offences.

The decision also addresses ancillary orders including sex offender registration and DNA sampling requirements.

The offender pleaded guilty to two counts of sexual interference and two counts of making child pornography involving a seven-year-old victim.

The offences occurred on two separate dates following online communications with the victim's stepfather.

The offender participated in the sexual abuse of the child and recorded the incidents.

A global sentence of eight years imprisonment was imposed, less time served of 404 days, resulting in a net sentence of six years and four months.

Extensive ancillary orders were made including lifetime sex offender registration, firearms prohibition, and strict conditions regarding contact with minors and internet access.

The accused pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography and careless storage of ammunition.

The Crown sought imprisonment of four to six months followed by three years probation.

Defence counsel sought 90 days intermittent imprisonment.

The court imposed 90 days intermittent imprisonment (served weekends over approximately 30 weeks), three years probation with strict conditions including house arrest during the intermittent sentence, a DNA order, Sex Offender Information Registration Act compliance for 10 years, a 10-year prohibition on accessing children under 16, forfeiture of computer equipment and media, a $500 fine for the ammunition charge, and a 10-year firearms prohibition.

The court balanced the seriousness of the offence against mitigating factors including the accused's otherwise good character, genuine remorse, engagement in counselling, guilty plea, and impact on his family.