Jody Howard Berkes

The applicant sought to introduce Signal messages exchanged with the complainant before and after an alleged sexual assault.

The complainant objected to the admissibility of certain exhibits under sections 276 and 278.92 of the Criminal Code.

The court determined that messages sent before the encounter (Exhibit 1) were admissible under both regimes as they were relevant to the issue of consent and did not engage prohibited twin myth reasoning.

Messages sent after the encounter (Exhibit 3) were found not to constitute a record under section 278.1 and were therefore admissible without requiring an application under section 278.92.

The court also addressed the effect of a partial waiver of privacy rights by the complainant.

The accused was charged with ten offences related to child pornography and breaches of a section 161 order, all stemming from items found on a cellular telephone seized during a search warrant execution.

The Crown alleged the accused possessed, accessed, and made available child pornography, made child pornography, committed sexual assault and sexual interference, and breached court orders.

The court found the accused guilty of possession and accessing child pornography, making child pornography available, making child pornography, and breaching a section 161 order regarding contact with minors.

The court acquitted on sexual assault and sexual interference due to the Crown's failure to prove the victim's identity as particularized in the information, and acquitted on other breach counts due to insufficient evidence.

Uygar Kaan Celenk was convicted by a jury of possession of 1.35 kg of fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking and two firearm offences (possession of a loaded prohibited firearm and possession of a firearm without a license/registration).

The Crown sought a 15-year prison sentence, while the Defence requested a conditional sentence of two years less a day.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the large quantity of fentanyl and the presence of a loaded prohibited firearm in a commercial vehicle, and mitigating factors such as the offender's youth, first-time offender status, rehabilitative potential, and childhood trauma.

Applying sentencing principles of denunciation and deterrence, balanced with rehabilitation and restraint, the court imposed a global sentence of 13 years imprisonment, with 1 year of credit for pre-trial custody and other factors, resulting in a remaining sentence of 12 years.

Ancillary orders included a 10-year firearm prohibition and a DNA order.

The offender, James Treloar, was found guilty after trial of accessing child pornography.

The Crown sought the maximum summary conviction sentence (two years less a day imprisonment) and various ancillary orders.

The defence sought a conditional discharge, conditional sentence, or intermittent sentence.

The court reviewed sentencing principles, aggravating and mitigating factors, and relevant case law on child pornography offences.

The judge rejected a conditional discharge, conditional sentence, and intermittent sentence, emphasizing denunciation and deterrence as primary sentencing objectives for such offences.

The court imposed a sentence of six months' imprisonment, to be followed by three years of probation, a DNA order, forfeiture of electronic devices, and a 10-year order under the Sexual Offender Information Registration Act (SOIRA).

A 5-year order under s. 161 of the Criminal Code with internet restrictions was also imposed, but conditions related to contact with persons under 16 or positions of trust were not imposed, given the offender's low risk of re-offending and the absence of evidence of child contact.

The applicant, charged with accessing child pornography, brought an application under sections 8 and 24(2) of the Charter to exclude evidence seized during the execution of a search warrant at his residence.

The defence argued that the information to obtain (ITO) did not provide reasonable grounds for the warrant, specifically raising concerns about the staleness of the information.

The Crown contended that the ITO disclosed sufficient information.

The court dismissed the application, concluding that the ITO contained reasonable grounds upon which the issuing justice could have issued the search warrant, emphasizing that the nature of child pornography as non-consumable digital evidence affects the staleness analysis.

The Crown appealed the conditional sentence of two years less a day imposed on the respondent, Joern Scholz, for fraud over $5,000.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge erred in principle by imposing a sentence outside the established range for major frauds and by failing to follow the proper analytical process for conditional sentences.

The court also found that the trial judge improperly considered the conduct of an OSC investigator as a mitigating factor for the convicted offence.

The appeal was allowed, the conditional sentence was set aside, and a three-year term of imprisonment was imposed.