Fentanyl

The appellant appealed her convictions for uttering forged prescriptions and possession of stolen property, as well as her 18-month sentence.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeals for uttering forged documents, finding no fatal errors in the Crown's examination of an accomplice or the trial judge's Vetrovec warning.

However, the court allowed the appeal on the possession of stolen property charge and ordered a new trial, as the jury was not properly instructed on the elements of theft, specifically 'fraudulently' and 'without colour of right'.

The sentence for the uttering charges was varied to a 12-month conditional sentence.

The appellant appealed her convictions and sentence for possession of heroin and fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking, and possession of methamphetamine.

The drugs were found during a search of her apartment, which she shared with her boyfriend.

The trial judge found she had knowledge and control of the drugs based on her presence, text messages, and surveillance evidence.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error.

The sentence appeal was also dismissed, as the trial judge made no error in principle in imposing a two-year sentence.

The appellants, John Disher and Reana Weaver, appealed their sentences for drug trafficking offences involving fentanyl and carfentanil.

Disher was originally sentenced to 12 years and Weaver to 7 years.

The Court of Appeal found that the sentencing judge erred by failing to consider Disher's rehabilitative prospects and by failing to properly apply the principles of restraint and rehabilitation for Weaver, a youthful, first-time Indigenous offender.

The appeals were allowed, and the sentences were reduced to 8 years for Disher and 4 years for Weaver.

The appellant appealed her convictions for possession of fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking and failing to comply with a recognizance.

She argued the trial judge erred by relying on hearsay from an informant and admitting a statement without a voir dire.

The Court of Appeal agreed the trial judge erred in both instances but applied the curative proviso, finding the remaining circumstantial evidence of guilt was overwhelming and the errors were harmless.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant appealed her conviction for possession of fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking, arguing that evidence should have been excluded due to Charter breaches.

The appellant was detained at a store for 40 minutes without being advised of her right to counsel, after which police searched her vehicle, arrested her, and found fentanyl.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge erred in requiring a causal connection for the s. 10(b) breach and found an additional s. 9 breach for arbitrary detention.

Applying the Grant framework, the Court concluded that the serious police conduct and substantial impact on the appellant's rights warranted exclusion of the evidence under s. 24(2).

The appeal was allowed and the conviction quashed.