Justice W. G. Rabley

The accused pleaded guilty to possession of proceeds of crime arising from a drug trafficking investigation (Project O'Woodcraft) involving the sale of heroin.

The accused, a 20-year-old first offender, acted as a courier for his father, transferring cash proceeds from drug sales.

The Crown sought 3-4 years imprisonment; the defence sought a conditional sentence of 2 years less a day.

The court imposed a conditional sentence of 21 months, balancing the seriousness of the offence and denunciatory principles against the accused's youth, genuine remorse, guilty plea, positive background, and lack of criminal record.

The accused pleaded guilty to trafficking in heroin, methamphetamine, and fentanyl as part of a four-month RCMP investigation into drug trafficking in Ontario.

Over three transactions between May and July 2019, the accused sold significant quantities of drugs to an undercover police agent for approximately $100,400 in total, receiving only a nominal amount in the low thousands of dollars for his role.

The court imposed a global sentence of 9 years in the penitentiary, reduced to 8 years after pre-trial custody credit on a 1.5:1 basis.

The court rejected the defence request for additional credit for harsh lockdown conditions during pre-trial custody.

The accused pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated assault and one count of assault with a weapon arising from three separate stabbing incidents that occurred on October 31-November 1, 2018, in Waterloo.

The incidents involved unprovoked attacks on three victims using a knife, with one victim suffering life-threatening injuries.

The court imposed a sentence of 42 months concurrent, reduced to 17 months after credit for 501 days of pre-trial custody on an enhanced basis.

The sentence was further subject to a three-year probation order with conditions including counselling, employment requirements, and a 20-year weapons prohibition.

The applicant brought a motion to exclude evidence obtained from a search warrant executed at a residence, arguing the Information to Obtain (ITO) was deficient and violated section 8 of the Charter.

The applicant contended there were insufficient grounds to establish the credibility and reliability of the confidential informant, inadequate corroboration, and material omissions in the ITO.

The court upheld the validity of the warrant, finding the confidential informant had a history of providing reliable information, the information was sufficiently corroborated through police investigation and surveillance, and the firearm information was compelling and recent enough to justify the warrant.

While the court found the omission regarding withdrawn charges was problematic, it determined this did not invalidate the warrant as there was compelling evidence independent of this omission.

The application was dismissed.

The defendants were convicted under the Conservation Authorities Act and sentenced to fines, incarceration, and a rehabilitation order.

They sought a stay of these orders pending appeal.

The court applied the test from R. v. Smug, considering whether the appeal was frivolous, whether continuation of the sentence was necessary in the public interest, and whether granting a stay would undermine public confidence in the administration of justice.

The court granted a stay of the incarceration and rehabilitation order but refused to stay the payment of fines, finding that the defendants had not demonstrated sufficient hardship and that allowing them to avoid payment would undermine public confidence given their history of similar violations and ongoing apparent non-compliance.

The accused was convicted after trial of accessing, possessing, making, and making available child pornography.

The sentencing decision addresses the gravity of offences involving child sexual abuse material, including 125 images and 3 videos found on the accused's devices, as well as sadistic and depraved chat logs depicting discussions of violent sexual abuse of children.

The court imposed a global sentence of four years imprisonment, emphasizing denunciation and deterrence as paramount sentencing principles for child pornography offences.

The decision also addresses ancillary orders including sex offender registration and DNA sampling requirements.