Jesse DiCecca

The offender was convicted of possession of fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking after 6.79 grams of a fentanyl/heroin mix was found on his person.

The Crown sought a sentence of 4.5 years, while the defence sought time served of 3.5 years.

The court considered the offender's difficult background, schizophrenia, and status as an addict trafficker, alongside the highly dangerous nature of fentanyl.

The court imposed a sentence of 3.5 years (credited as time served) followed by 2 years of probation with strict conditions to address his mental health and addiction issues.

The Ontario Review Board recommended an inquiry to determine if criminal proceedings against Ms. McDonald, who was found unfit to stand trial for arson, should be stayed.

Following a joint recommendation from counsel and an assessment confirming permanent unfitness and low public threat, the court ordered a stay of proceedings.

The decision considered the seriousness of the offence, the salutary effects of the stay (focus on treatment, judicial resource savings), and public confidence in the administration of justice, concluding that reasonable, well-informed persons would not expect indefinite proceedings for a permanently unfit individual.

The applicant sought an order in the nature of certiorari to quash a bail revocation order made by an Ontario Court of Justice judge during a fitness to stand trial hearing.

The Superior Court examined whether the lower court judge had jurisdiction under s. 523(2)(a) of the Criminal Code to revoke bail on her own motion, without cause being shown, and whether a fitness hearing constituted a "trial" for the purposes of that section.

The court found that the lower court judge lacked jurisdiction, as s. 523(2)(a) applies only to a trial judge presiding over the trial proper, and inherent jurisdiction could not be used to circumvent statutory limitations on liberty rights.

The defendant, CH, was found guilty of assault and breach of a probation order, marking his third conviction for domestic assault against the same complainant.

The Crown sought a 12-month custodial sentence for assault and a consecutive 6 months for breach of probation, plus 3 years' probation.

The defence requested a 90-day concurrent 30-day custodial period.

The court considered aggravating factors including the repeated and escalating nature of the domestic violence, the complainant's psychological vulnerability, and the defendant's lack of remorse.

Mitigating factors included the defendant's diagnosed schizophrenia and significant pre-trial custody spent in a medical facility.

The court sentenced CH to 12 months in custody followed by 2 years' probation.

Due to credit for 21 months and 6 days of pre-trial custody, the custodial portion was deemed served, and CH was to begin probation immediately.

Ancillary orders included a DNA order, a 10-year firearms prohibition, and a 3-year no-contact order with the complainant.

The Crown applied for a treatment order under s. 672.58 of the Criminal Code after the accused, who suffered from schizophrenia, was found unfit to stand trial.

The judge declined to make the order because the accused did not consent to treatment, preferring the civil provincial regime.

The Crown sought certiorari to quash the decision.

The Superior Court found that while the judge erred in law by allowing the accused's lack of consent to override the statutory purpose of the treatment order, the error was not jurisdictional.

The application for certiorari was dismissed.