Jordan Weisz

The offender pleaded guilty to aggravated assault after attacking a building superintendent with a knife.

The court accepted a joint submission for a four-year sentence, taking into account the offender's schizophrenia, guilty plea, and harsh conditions of pre-sentence custody during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Applying enhanced credit for time served, the court suspended the passing of sentence and imposed three years of probation.

The offender was convicted of aggravated assault against his intimate partner, who was pregnant, deaf, mute, and unconscious at the time of the attack.

The victim suffered life-threatening injuries.

The court considered the offender's substance abuse, remorse, and the harsh conditions of his pre-trial custody during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The court imposed a gross sentence of 7 years, reduced to 2 years, 6 months, and 11 days after applying credit for pre-sentence custody.

The accused was charged with the attempted murder of his spouse and assault with a weapon against another individual.

The court acquitted the accused of the assault with a weapon charge due to the unreliability of the complainant's evidence.

On the attempted murder charge, security video captured the accused brutally beating his unconscious spouse, causing life-threatening injuries.

The court found the specific intent to kill was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but convicted the accused of the included offence of aggravated assault, rejecting the defence of necessity.

The accused pleaded guilty to assault with a weapon, assault causing bodily harm, forcible confinement, and breach of recognizance against his former intimate partner.

The parties initially presented a joint submission structured to minimize the accused's immigration consequences, proposing two consecutive sentences of six months less a day.

The accused later sought to strike his guilty pleas but failed to file the necessary motion materials after multiple adjournments.

The court denied a further adjournment and proceeded to sentencing.

Applying the Cerasuolo test, the court accepted the joint submission, finding it fell within the appropriate range given the mix of aggravating and mitigating factors, and strongly recommended that immigration officials exercise discretion against removing the accused from Canada.

The five applicants were jointly charged with offences relating to a fraudulent enterprise involving staged automobile accidents.

They applied for severance under s. 591(3)(b) of the Criminal Code.

Four of the co-accused intended to run a defence of lack of knowledge, arguing they were duped by the alleged ringleader, Bajwa, and intended to adduce bad character evidence against him.

The court found that the existence of antagonistic defences and the general prejudice to the co-accused outweighed the desire to avoid multiple proceedings.

The court ordered that Bajwa be tried separately from the other four co-accused, who would be tried jointly.