Fentanyl trafficking

The Crown sought leave to appeal a conditional sentence of two years less a day, with house arrest, followed by three years of probation, imposed on the respondent for trafficking fentanyl.

The respondent, an addict, had sold a small quantity of fentanyl to a friend who subsequently died.

The Crown argued the sentence was demonstrably unfit, disproportionate, and failed to meet objectives of denunciation and deterrence.

The Court of Appeal granted leave but dismissed the appeal, finding the sentencing judge properly considered significant mitigating factors, including the respondent's extraordinary rehabilitation efforts, early guilty plea, remorse, and strict pre-trial bail conditions, concluding the sentence was not demonstrably unfit despite the gravity of the offence.

The accused pleaded guilty to trafficking fentanyl, a Schedule I substance, after a friend died from consuming the drug he sold.

The Crown sought a six-year custodial sentence, emphasizing the victim's death and the dangerous nature of fentanyl.

The defence sought a conditional sentence of two years less a day, highlighting the accused's status as an addict trafficker, his significant rehabilitative efforts, early guilty plea, and compliance with strict bail conditions.

The court imposed a conditional sentence of two years less a day, followed by three years probation, including house arrest, a DNA order, and a 10-year weapons prohibition.

The decision distinguished between commercial traffickers and addict traffickers, emphasizing rehabilitation and the principle of proportionality.

Aladin Abdelgadir pleaded guilty to possession of fentanyl and MDA for the purpose of trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime.

The court considered the significant quantity of fentanyl (over 2 kg), the accused's awareness of the opioid crisis and the dangers of fentanyl, his motivation by profit, and his related criminal record, including being on parole at the time of the offence.

Mitigating factors included his guilty plea, intelligence, and social context evidence related to systemic racism and a troubled upbringing.

The court emphasized general and specific deterrence due to the grave harm caused by fentanyl trafficking.

A global sentence of 13 years was imposed.

The offender, Jesse Egan, was sentenced for possession of fentanyl for the purposes of trafficking (110.64 grams).

The Crown sought 6-8 years imprisonment, classifying him as a mid-level trafficker, emphasizing deterrence and denunciation due to the pernicious nature of fentanyl and the national opioid crisis.

The defence sought a conditional sentence of two years house arrest followed by three years probation, highlighting the offender's significant rehabilitative efforts since his arrest, including overcoming addiction, starting a business, and supporting his young family, and arguing his addiction stemmed from a prior injury.

The court found a conditional sentence unfit given the quantity and danger of fentanyl, and the offender's prior criminal record.

While acknowledging the offender's commendable rehabilitation and applying credit for pre-sentence custody and stringent bail conditions (Downes and Duncan credit), the court imposed a penitentiary sentence of five years, reduced to four years and ten months after credit.

The accused, Wilton Williams, pleaded guilty to possession for the purpose of trafficking in fentanyl.

The Crown sought a three-year penitentiary sentence, while the defence requested a conditional sentence of two years less a day.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the quantity of fentanyl and cocaine, and numerous mitigating factors, such as the offender's lack of criminal record, youthfulness, remorse, significant rehabilitative efforts (obtaining welding qualifications), strong family support, and the impact of anti-Black racism on his life choices.

The court emphasized that deterrence and denunciation are primary objectives in fentanyl trafficking cases, but rehabilitation remains important, especially when social context evidence is presented.

The court found that a conditional sentence would be consistent with sentencing principles, promoting rehabilitation without endangering community safety, and would be more effective than institutional custody in ensuring the offender remains on a positive path.

The Applicant, Parteek Ghuman, faced charges of possession of fentanyl for trafficking and obstruction of justice.

He brought a Charter application (voir dire) to exclude evidence obtained during a warrantless vehicle search and alleged violations of his s. 8 (unreasonable search/seizure) and s. 10(b) (right to counsel) rights.

The court found that the police officer lacked reasonable grounds for the search under the Cannabis Control Act, using it as a pretext for a criminal investigation.

The officer also failed to promptly inform Ghuman of his right to counsel upon detention and delayed implementing that right after arrest.

Concluding that the cumulative breaches were serious and impacted Ghuman's Charter interests significantly, the court excluded the evidence (fentanyl, cash, digital scale, cell phones, and false name) under s. 24(2) of the Charter, leading to Ghuman's acquittal.

The offender, Kevin Gordon, pleaded guilty to possession of fentanyl for the purposes of trafficking.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the dangerous nature of fentanyl and his criminal record, and significant mitigating factors, such as his guilty plea, the fact that his trafficking was driven by addiction rather than greed, and his substantial rehabilitative efforts since his arrest (securing housing, employment, and becoming drug-free).

The Crown sought a three-year sentence, while the defence sought a conditional sentence of two years less a day.

Applying sentencing principles, particularly the emphasis on rehabilitation for addict-traffickers, the court imposed a conditional sentence of two years less a day, followed by 18 months of probation, along with ancillary orders.

This is a voluntariness ruling in a preliminary inquiry concerning charges of trafficking in a Schedule I substance (fentanyl) and manslaughter.

The Crown sought to admit a video-recorded police statement made by the accused.

The court applied the contextual voluntariness test, considering factors such as threats, promises, inducements, atmosphere of oppression, operating mind, and police trickery.

Despite the accused repeatedly asserting his right to silence and expressing internal conflict, the court found that he had an operating mind and freely chose to speak.

The court concluded that the statement was made voluntarily and was therefore admissible for the purposes of the preliminary inquiry.

The appellant, Todd Kehoe, appealed his conviction for trafficking in fentanyl patches, knowingly causing a person to use forged fentanyl patches, and obtaining merchandise by false pretenses.

The appeal challenged the trial judge's s. 24(2) ruling, which dismissed an application to exclude evidence arising from an alleged s. 8 Charter breach.

The Court of Appeal did not need to definitively rule on the s. 8 issue, finding no error in the trial judge's s. 24(2) analysis, which properly engaged with a Grant analysis and was owed deference.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant, convicted of fentanyl trafficking, sought bail pending his application for leave to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Crown opposed, arguing the application was frivolous and detention was necessary in the public interest.

The court found the proposed application for leave had low to nil chances of success, as the Court of Appeal had already thoroughly addressed the Charter issues.

The court emphasized the high public interest in enforceability, particularly given the gravity of large-scale fentanyl trafficking, which outweighed the applicant's health concerns.

The application for bail was dismissed.

The appellant, a pharmacist, was convicted of trafficking in fentanyl, fraud, and public mischief, and sentenced to 14 years' incarceration.

He appealed both his conviction and sentence.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding no errors in the trial judge's Charter rulings (s. 11(b), s. 7, s. 8) or assessment of evidence, including the handling of a Vetrovec witness.

However, the court granted leave to appeal the sentence, finding that the trial judge erred by failing to sufficiently apply the principle of restraint for a first-time offender with health issues.

The sentence was reduced from 14 years to 12 years imprisonment.

Robert Cada, an Indigenous person, pleaded guilty to possession of fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking.

The Crown sought an 8-year custodial sentence, while the defence argued for 4 years based on the parity principle with a non-Indigenous co-accused and factors related to Mr. Cada's Indigenous heritage.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the large quantity of fentanyl and Mr. Cada's significant criminal record, and mitigating factors, such as his guilty plea and the impact of intergenerational trauma as outlined in his Gladue Report.

The court sentenced Mr. Cada to 7 years imprisonment, less credit for pre-sentence custody, along with a DNA order, a lifetime weapons prohibition, and a forfeiture order.

This is a sentencing decision for a 24-year-old first offender who pleaded guilty to possession of fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking.

The defendant, a fentanyl addict, was intercepted delivering 15.6 grams of the drug on behalf of another person.

Despite the Crown seeking a penitentiary sentence of 4.5 years due to the severe harm caused by fentanyl, the court imposed a conditional sentence of two years less one day.

The judge found this to be an exceptional case, considering the defendant's guilty plea, lack of criminal record, successful rehabilitation efforts, strong family support, and status as a youthful first offender, which engaged the principle of restraint.

The decision applied the Supreme Court of Canada's ruling in R. v. Sharma, which made conditional sentences available for offences with maximum sentences of 10 years or more, and emphasized that denunciation and deterrence can be achieved through a punitive conditional sentence with house arrest and electronic supervision.

The accused, Benjamin Shearer, pleaded guilty to trafficking in fentanyl, possession of fentanyl, and carrying a concealed weapon.

The Crown sought a custodial sentence of two years less a day, while the defence proposed an 18-month conditional sentence.

The court considered the seriousness of fentanyl trafficking and the opioid epidemic, along with the accused's background as a youthful first offender with a long-standing opioid addiction and significant rehabilitative efforts since his arrest.

The court also ruled on the admissibility and necessary redactions of community impact statements.

Applying the principles of proportionality, denunciation, deterrence, and rehabilitation, the court imposed a 20-month conditional sentence for trafficking in fentanyl, a time-served sentence for simple possession, and a concurrent 6-month conditional sentence for carrying a concealed weapon, followed by two years of probation.

The case concerns the sentencing of Tyson Kennedy for multiple offences, including fraud over $5000, possession of fentanyl for trafficking, impaired driving, and breach of release orders.

The primary issue was the calculation of pre-sentence custody credit, specifically the application of "Duncan credit" for harsh conditions due to COVID-19 lockdowns.

The court reviewed the joint submission for a 42-month sentence, finding it lenient but acceptable, and then determined the appropriate credit, granting 0.5 days Duncan credit for each of the 73 lockdown days, in addition to the standard 1.5:1 Summers credit.

Motaz Haj pleaded guilty to two counts of fentanyl trafficking, one to an undercover officer and one as a party to a sale that resulted in a fatal overdose.

The court considered a joint submission for a six-year sentence, with the primary issue being the credit for pre-sentence custody, particularly concerning harsh conditions at the Toronto South Detention Centre during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The court emphasized the devastating impact of fentanyl and the victim's death as aggravating factors, balanced against the guilty plea, remorse, and difficult custody conditions.

The judge ultimately accepted the joint submission for a six-year sentence, crediting the offender with time served, including enhanced credit for pre-sentence custody and a further credit for harsh conditions, followed by a two-year probation period.

Hayden Bieber pleaded guilty to impaired operation of a conveyance, possession of property obtained by crime, possession of a weapon dangerous to public peace (all Criminal Code offences), and possession of fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking (Controlled Drugs and Substances Act).

The offences occurred following a traffic stop where police found drugs, cash, and brass knuckles.

Bieber, 25, had no prior criminal record and had made significant efforts towards rehabilitation, including abstaining from drugs for a year and attending Narcotics Anonymous.

The Crown sought a 4-year incarceration, while the defence requested a conditional sentence of two years less a day, or a sentence in the upper reformatory/lower penitentiary range if incarceration was necessary.

The court emphasized denunciation and general deterrence for fentanyl trafficking, finding that a conditional sentence was inappropriate despite Bieber's rehabilitative efforts and lack of criminal record.

The judge imposed a global sentence of 36 months (3 years) of imprisonment, after applying credit for pre-sentence release conditions and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on incarceration.

Ancillary orders included a DNA sample, a 10-year weapons prohibition, and forfeiture/destruction of seized substances.

Sarah Davison pleaded guilty to multiple drug trafficking and possession charges, including fentanyl and cocaine, and several Criminal Code offences.

The Crown sought a 6-year sentence, while the defence sought 4 years.

The court found Davison to be a mid-level dealer, distinguishing her from an "addict dealer" as characterized in prior case law.

Applying principles of denunciation and deterrence, while also considering rehabilitation, the court imposed a 6-year concurrent sentence for the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA) trafficking and possession for purpose offences, 5 months concurrent for simple possession, and 30 days concurrent for the Criminal Code charges.

The court sentenced Vuk Peric after he pleaded guilty to two counts of possession of fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking, involving a total of 82.63 grams.

The offences occurred while he was on bail for prior drug-related charges.

The central issue was determining a proportionate sentence, considering the principle of totality with a previously imposed four-year sentence for other offences.

The court balanced aggravating factors, such as the nature and quantity of fentanyl, re-offending while on bail, and a significant criminal record, against mitigating factors, including guilty pleas, harsh pre-trial detention conditions during the pandemic, and his struggles with addiction and challenging personal background.

The court imposed concurrent four-year sentences for the current offences, to run consecutively to the prior sentence, resulting in a functional equivalent of an eight-year global sentence.

After pre-sentence credit, 14.5 months remained to be served.

Devonte Blair pleaded guilty to possession of a loaded restricted handgun, possession for the purpose of trafficking in fentanyl, and breach of a weapons prohibition order.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the combination of drugs and a loaded weapon, the involvement of fentanyl, and the offender's repeat weapons history.

Mitigating factors included his youth, disadvantaged background, guilty plea (which saved court resources and waived arguable Charter issues), and the increased risk of infection due to the COVID-19 pandemic during his incarceration.

The court applied sentencing principles, including proportionality and similarity to comparable cases.

A notional sentence of 75 months (65 months concurrent for drug and weapon offences, 10 months consecutive for breach of prohibition) was imposed.

After applying 1.5:1 "Summers" credit for 838 days of presentence custody (42 months) and "Duncan" credit for harsh conditions (18 months), the net sentence remaining to be served was 15 months.

A 12-month probation, DNA order, and lifetime section 109 order were also imposed.