J. Struthers

The offenders were convicted of firearms trafficking and related offences committed in association with a criminal organization that imported firearms from the United States to Toronto.

The Crown sought sentences of 9 and 12 years, while the defence sought 4 and 6-8 years.

The court emphasized denunciation and deterrence given the severe risk firearms pose to the community, while also considering the offenders' lack of prior records and prospects for rehabilitation.

The court sentenced the first offender to 6 years and the second offender to 9 years in custody, with credit given for pre-sentence custody and stringent bail conditions.

The accused, Bill Allison and Kamar Cunningham, were charged with multiple offences related to firearms trafficking and participation in a criminal organization following a police investigation dubbed 'Project Patton'.

The Crown alleged that the accused were involved in importing firearms from the United States and distributing them in Toronto.

The court relied heavily on intercepted communications using coded language.

Mr. Allison testified, claiming he only received firearms for personal use, but his evidence was rejected.

Mr. Allison was found guilty of firearms trafficking, offering to transfer a firearm, and conspiracy.

Mr. Cunningham was found guilty of firearms trafficking, participating in a criminal organization, and possession for the purpose of transferring, but was acquitted of conspiracy due to reasonable doubt about his membership.

The accused was charged with conspiracy to traffic in cocaine and marijuana and with trafficking offences arising from a police wiretap investigation known as Project Gladiator.

The defence brought a Charter application challenging a Highway Traffic Act stop used to identify the accused as the driver involved in a suspected drug transaction.

The court held the stop did not violate ss. 7, 8, 9, or 10 of the Charter and that, in any event, the identity evidence would be admissible under s. 24(2).

On the merits, the Crown relied largely on circumstantial evidence and surveillance to prove that the accused transported drugs and participated in a conspiracy with two other individuals.

The court found the circumstances highly suspicious but concluded the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that drugs were actually exchanged, that the substance was cocaine or marijuana, or that the accused had the required knowledge for conspiracy to traffic in the specific drugs alleged.

The accused was acquitted on all counts.

The accused brought a Garofoli application seeking to exclude evidence of a firearm and cocaine found during the execution of a search warrant at his apartment, alleging a breach of his s. 8 Charter rights.

The search warrant was based largely on information from two confidential informants.

The court applied the step 6 Garofoli procedure, providing a judicial summary of excised material and permitting limited cross-examination of the affiant.

The court found the informants' information was credible, compelling, and sufficiently corroborated by police investigation to establish reasonable and probable grounds for the warrant.

The application was dismissed, with the court noting that even if a breach had occurred, the evidence would not be excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter.

The accused was charged with manslaughter following the death of her common-law spouse, who was cut during an altercation at a house party.

The Crown sought to admit a portion of the accused's statement to police made during a 15.5-hour interrogation.

The court found that the police lacked reasonable and probable grounds to arrest the accused, rendering her detention unlawful and a breach of section 9 of the Charter.

Furthermore, the police violated the accused's right to silence by using a Commissioner of Oaths to compel a KGB statement under threat of criminal sanction.

The court excluded the statement under both the common law confessions rule and section 24(2) of the Charter.