Kenneth Robert Byers

The youthful offender pleaded guilty to dangerous driving causing bodily harm after crossing the center line and striking an oncoming vehicle head-on, causing significant injuries to two elderly passengers.

The Crown sought six to nine months of incarceration, while the defence sought a 90-day intermittent sentence.

The court weighed the aggravating factors of prolonged dangerous driving and severe victim impact against the mitigating factors of a guilty plea, lack of prior record, and the offender's mental health struggles.

The court imposed a 90-day intermittent jail sentence and a four-year driving prohibition.

The accused pleaded guilty to making visual recordings of three female employees for a sexual purpose by placing a recording device under their dresses while at their place of employment between May 29, 2015 and September 16, 2015, contrary to section 162(1) of the Criminal Code.

The Crown proceeded summarily with the accused's consent.

The court imposed a conditional discharge with probation for three years, finding that while the offence was serious and involved a breach of trust as a senior vice-president, the accused's lack of criminal record, guilty plea, psychiatric assessment indicating low risk of reoffence, and collateral consequences warranted this disposition rather than a custodial sentence.

The accused was charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle and operating a motor vehicle with more than 80 mg of alcohol in 100 ml of blood.

A police officer observed the accused's vehicle being driven at high speed and revving its engine, conducted a traffic stop, and arrested the accused first for possession of a controlled substance based on observation of a glass pipe, and subsequently for impaired operation based on odour of alcohol and a single stumble.

The court found that the officer lacked reasonable and probable grounds for either arrest, constituting violations of sections 8 and 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The breath samples were excluded under section 24(2) of the Charter, and the accused was acquitted of both charges.

A young adult offender pled guilty to dangerous driving arising from a prearranged street racing incident that resulted in the deaths of two of his friends.

The Crown sought a conditional sentence of four months, while defence counsel sought a conditional discharge.

The court imposed a conditional discharge with a two-year probation order, finding that specific deterrence and rehabilitation were the paramount sentencing objectives for a first-time young offender.

The court considered the offender's youth, lack of prior record, genuine remorse, and strong family support, balanced against the serious and planned nature of the dangerous driving conduct.

The accused pleaded guilty to assault causing bodily harm contrary to section 267(b) of the Criminal Code.

The offence involved a single forceful punch delivered without warning to the victim's face outside a bar, resulting in a fractured jaw in two places requiring surgery, a minor concussion, and significant physical, emotional, and financial harm.

The victim suffered two months with his jaw wired shut, was unable to speak or eat solid foods, lost employment, and required ongoing medical and dental treatment.

The accused was 19 years old at the time of the offence, had no prior criminal record, and demonstrated remorse and rehabilitation efforts post-arrest.

The court balanced aggravating factors (premeditated nature of the assault, severity of injuries) against mitigating factors (youth, clean record, genuine remorse, rehabilitation efforts) in determining an appropriate sentence.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging sexual assault and harassment by the owner of the respondent dental practice.

The respondent requested that the application be deferred pending the resolution of related criminal charges against the owner.

The Tribunal found that the criminal proceedings pre-dated the application and stemmed from the same facts, raising the possibility of inconsistent findings.

The Tribunal ordered the application deferred until the conclusion of the criminal proceeding.