Cocaine

The accused pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking after police found 192 grams of cocaine and 583 grams of a cutting agent in his safe.

The Crown sought 30 to 36 months' imprisonment, while the defence sought a conditional sentence order.

The court found the accused was a mid-level trafficker motivated by profit, making a conditional sentence inappropriate due to the paramount principles of denunciation and deterrence.

The accused was sentenced to two years less a day in custody, followed by 18 months of probation.

The two accused were charged with possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking after police discovered 381 grams of cocaine hidden behind a plastic panel in the center console of the vehicle they were in.

The police had stopped the vehicle to arrest the passenger on outstanding warrants and conducted a search incident to arrest.

The court dismissed the accused's Charter applications, finding the arrest and search lawful.

At trial, the court found the passenger guilty based on circumstantial evidence establishing his knowledge and control of the drugs.

The driver was acquitted, as the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew about the hidden cocaine.

Sentence appeal from a guilty plea involving cocaine-related offending.

The Court of Appeal held that the sentencing judge erred by adding six months based on an unproven factual premise that the appellant had negotiated for the purchase of one kilogram of cocaine, where the guilty plea record showed that fact was disputed and the Crown did not prove it.

The court further held that the appellant was entitled to some credit under the applicable framework for time spent on strict bail terms and house arrest, notwithstanding that he was also on parole subject only to standard non-restrictive conditions.

Leave to appeal sentence was granted and the sentence was reduced to 34 months.

The appellant appealed his conviction, arguing that a pat-down search conducted by a police officer was unreasonable and that the trial judge's finding that the cocaine belonged to him was speculative.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial judge's finding that the search was conducted solely for officer safety and that the amount and value of the cocaine justified the inference of ownership.

The appellant appealed his nine-year sentence for importing 4.1 kg of cocaine.

The trial judge found that the appellant organized the importation and was in a superior position to the 19-year-old vulnerable courier.

The Court of Appeal found no error in principle and held that the sentence was not demonstrably unfit given the appellant's role and the multi-kilo quantity of cocaine.

The appeal was dismissed.