Jordana Goldlist

The accused was arrested for possession of a weapon and obstruct justice.

While detained, he made an unsolicited utterance about stabbing someone in the park.

The investigating officer, aware of a recent stabbing in that park, proceeded to ask the accused questions about the stabbing without re-advising him of his s. 10(b) Charter right to counsel.

The court found that the accused's jeopardy had changed, triggering a duty to re-advise him of his rights, which the officer failed to do, resulting in a s. 10(b) breach.

However, applying the Grant framework under s. 24(2), the court concluded that the utterance was admissible, as the breach was on the lower end of seriousness, had minimal impact, and society's interest favoured adjudication on the merits.

The offender was convicted of second-degree murder after shooting a stranger in an LCBO parking lot following a verbal dispute over social distancing.

The Crown sought a 15-year period of parole ineligibility, while the defence sought 10 to 12 years.

The court considered the aggravating factors, including the public nature of the shooting and the devastating impact on the victim's family, alongside mitigating factors such as the offender's youth, harsh pre-sentence custody conditions, and the impact of systemic anti-Black racism.

The court imposed a life sentence with a 14-year period of parole ineligibility, along with mandatory weapons prohibition, DNA, and non-communication orders.

The Crown applied to admit an utterance made by the accused to police during his arrest for an unrelated weapons offence, in which he admitted to stabbing someone days prior.

The defence argued the statement was involuntary because the accused was experiencing a mental health crisis, lacked an operating mind, and was not cautioned.

The court found that while the accused displayed signs of a mental health condition, he possessed the requisite cognitive ability to understand he was speaking to police and that his statements could be used against him.

The court also found the accused had been cautioned multiple times.

The statement was ruled voluntary and admissible.

The offender was convicted of second-degree murder for shooting an unarmed 17-year-old victim five times in a residential neighbourhood.

At the time of the offence, the offender was bound by multiple court orders, including a probation order imposed earlier that same day.

The court considered the offender's difficult upbringing, exposure to systemic anti-Black racism, and harsh pre-trial custody conditions as mitigating factors.

However, given the unprovoked nature of the public shooting, the use of a firearm, and the offender's blatant disregard for court orders, the court emphasized denunciation and deterrence.

The offender was sentenced to life imprisonment with parole ineligibility set at 17 years.