John Navarette

The offender pleaded guilty to manslaughter after setting up a home invasion robbery during which the victim was shot and killed by a co-accused.

The Crown and defence jointly submitted a sentence of 7 years imprisonment but disagreed on the quantum of pre-sentence custody credit for lockdowns and COVID-19 conditions.

The court accepted the joint submission of 7 years and granted 55 months of pre-sentence credit, including 8 months of enhanced credit for staffing-related lockdowns and pandemic conditions, resulting in a remaining sentence of 2 years and 5 months.

The appellant was convicted by a jury of importing cocaine and sentenced to six years' imprisonment.

He appealed the conviction, arguing the trial judge erred in refusing to declare a mistrial after jurors observed him in the courthouse lobby.

He also appealed the sentence, arguing it violated the parity principle because two co-accused received conditional sentences.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's handling of the mistrial application and concluding the sentence was appropriate given the appellant's major role in the smuggling enterprise compared to his co-accused.

The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle while disqualified from doing so contrary to section 549(5) of the Criminal Code.

The accused had been convicted of refusing to provide a breath sample in 2011 and was subject to driving restrictions including an ignition interlock requirement under the Highway Traffic Act.

The accused operated a dump truck without the required interlock device installed.

The defence conceded the Crown proved the actus reus but argued the Crown had not proven mens rea, claiming the accused was unaware of the interlock requirement over a year after his conviction.

The court found the Crown proved the charge beyond a reasonable doubt and entered a finding of guilt.