Firearms Prohibition

The accused was convicted of possession of crack cocaine for the purpose of trafficking (not for commercial purpose) contrary to s. 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and breaching a probation order contrary to s. 733.1 of the Criminal Code.

The sentencing hearing considered the accused's personal background, including ADHD and learning disabilities diagnosed at a young age, exposure to racism, family instability, and addiction issues.

The court rejected the Crown's submission that the accused's incomplete participation in rehabilitation programming should be treated as an aggravating factor.

The court imposed a sentence of 7 months imprisonment (with credit for pre-trial custody and residential programming already served), followed by 18 months of probation with conditions including drug counselling, school attendance or employment, and community service.

A mandatory lifetime firearms prohibition was imposed.

The Crown brought an application under section 111 of the Criminal Code seeking to prohibit the respondent from possessing firearms and related items.

The respondent, a correctional officer diagnosed with PTSD, had voluntarily given his firearms to his brother-in-law in summer 2016 due to concerns about his mental health and violent thoughts.

When he requested their return in February 2017, coinciding with receipt of family law documents regarding custody, his wife and brother-in-law contacted police.

The court found that despite the respondent's safe storage practices and lack of actual violent conduct, legitimate concerns existed regarding his responsibility and discipline as a gun owner, given his recent history of suicidal and homicidal ideation, ongoing PTSD, and stressful life circumstances.

A three-year prohibition order was imposed.

The Crown applied for a firearms prohibition order under section 111(5) of the Criminal Code against the respondent, who had been found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for discharging a firearm with intent to wound or maim, possession of a firearm while prohibited, possession of ammunition while prohibited, and possession of prohibited devices.

The respondent had a significant criminal history including convictions for dangerous operation of a motor vehicle and unauthorized possession of prohibited or restricted weapons.

The court found that the respondent suffered from significant mental illness that, when untreated, led to violent conflict and resulted in him firing a shotgun at police officers.

The respondent lacked insight into his illness and indicated he would stop taking prescribed medication if given the choice.

The court granted the prohibition order for the maximum period of five years.

The offender pleaded guilty to robbing Jonathan Pavkovic in Orangeville on July 31, 2016.

The offence involved a vicious unprovoked sucker punch that rendered the victim unconscious, followed by theft of his wallet, house keys, and cell phone while he lay bleeding and defenceless.

The offender was intoxicated, driving with a suspended licence in violation of an alcohol-free condition, and ignored pleas from his companion to desist.

The offender has an extensive criminal history including twelve violent convictions over fourteen years and demonstrated poor institutional behaviour during 372 days of pre-trial custody.

The court imposed an 18-month custodial sentence with 1:1 credit for pre-trial custody, resulting in 170 days remaining, followed by three years probation with strict conditions including restitution, DNA order, lifetime firearms prohibition, and communication prohibition.

The offender was convicted of intimidating a justice participant and breaching a recognizance following his conduct at a preliminary inquiry.

While testifying as a witness in domestic violence charges against the offender, the victim was subjected to a cut-throat gesture and threatening words by the offender.

The court imposed a sentence of eight months custody on the intimidation charge and two months concurrent on the breach charge, followed by 18 months probation with strict conditions including non-association with the victim.

DNA orders and a lifetime firearms prohibition were also imposed.

The court emphasized the seriousness of offences against the administration of justice and the need to protect witnesses and the integrity of the judicial process.

The offender pleaded guilty to multiple counts of assault and one count of mischief arising from domestic incidents involving a former intimate partner.

The court considered sentencing principles under the Criminal Code including denunciation, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

Aggravating factors included repeated domestic violence against a partner, while mitigating factors included a guilty plea, absence of a criminal record, restitution, counselling, and a highly favourable presentence report.

The court rejected a conditional discharge as contrary to the public interest but found that incarceration was unnecessary.

A suspended sentence with eighteen months’ probation was imposed along with ancillary orders including DNA and a firearms prohibition.

The accused was convicted by a jury of manslaughter arising from a planned robbery of a banquet hall poker tournament that resulted in the fatal shooting of a bystander.

At sentencing, the court made factual findings consistent with the jury’s verdict and concluded the accused was a principal organizer of the robbery and knew or ought to have known that firearms would be used.

Aggravating factors included extensive planning, the presence of over 100 patrons, the use of firearms, significant prior criminal record, and the death of a Good Samaritan attempting to intervene.

The court emphasized denunciation and deterrence as dominant sentencing principles in armed robbery-related manslaughter.

The offender’s difficult background and limited mitigating factors did not outweigh the seriousness of the offence.

The court sentenced an Indigenous offender following a guilty plea arising from a fatal shooting within a First Nation community.

The sentencing judge emphasized the importance of reconciliation, the historical and social context affecting Indigenous communities, and the application of s. 718.2(e) of the Criminal Code and Gladue principles.

The offender received credit for significant pre‑trial custody and was sentenced to an additional custodial term pursuant to a joint submission by counsel.

The court also issued ancillary orders including a DNA order and a firearms prohibition order, subject to a limited exception permitting firearm use for sustenance hunting in accordance with Indigenous practices.

Sentencing decision for robbery and multiple breaches of recognizance arising from a late-night convenience store robbery in which the offender threatened to shoot the clerk with a purported firearm.

The offender pleaded guilty and had served approximately 16 months of pre‑trial custody, credited as two years.

The court considered the offender’s extensive criminal record alongside Gladue factors, including a traumatic upbringing, substance abuse, and systemic issues affecting Indigenous offenders.

Applying the principles from Gladue, Wells, and Ipeelee, the court found the punitive objectives of sentencing had been satisfied by pre‑trial detention.

A suspended sentence with three years’ probation was imposed, with rehabilitative and community‑based conditions.

Following convictions for attempted murder and related firearm and violence offences arising from a brief but violent incident, the court imposed a global penitentiary sentence.

The offender abducted and confined the complainant at gunpoint in retaliation for a dispute with her partner and attempted to shoot her, but the firearm malfunctioned.

The court reviewed appellate jurisprudence on sentencing ranges for attempted murder and assessed aggravating and mitigating circumstances, including the offender’s criminal record, the absence of physical injury, and the psychological impact on the victim.

Applying the totality principle and granting enhanced credit for pre-sentence custody, the court determined that a 10‑year global sentence was appropriate before credit.

After credit of 35 months for pre‑sentence custody, the effective sentence imposed was 85 months' imprisonment.

The offender pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking.

The Crown sought four years imprisonment while the defence argued for a two-year penitentiary sentence.

The court imposed a 30-month sentence, classifying the offence as low-level trafficking based on the quantity of 69 grams seized.

The court considered mitigating factors including guilty plea, remorse, and rehabilitation efforts against aggravating factors including prior criminal record and the commercial nature of the offence.

A lifetime firearms prohibition under section 109 of the Criminal Code was imposed, along with a DNA order and forfeiture of seized items.

The offender was convicted by a jury of two counts of assault causing bodily harm and two counts of assault with a weapon arising from a downtown fight in which he struck two victims with a metal bicycle lock and inflicted significant injuries, including a broken jaw.

The principal issue at trial was self-defence, which the jury rejected.

The sentencing court emphasized denunciation and deterrence given the seriousness of the weapon-based assault and the offender’s extensive criminal record, including prior violent offences.

Applying the Kienapple principle, the assault with a weapon counts were conditionally stayed and convictions were entered on the assault causing bodily harm counts.

The court imposed a global sentence of 30 months’ imprisonment with 19 months’ credit for pre-sentence custody, resulting in 11 months to be served, along with lifetime firearms prohibitions, DNA orders, and two years’ probation with no-contact conditions.

The offender was sentenced following convictions for three counts of sexual interference against a 14‑year‑old child who was a friend of the offender’s daughter.

The offences involved repeated sexual touching and vaginal intercourse over multiple incidents.

The court emphasized denunciation and deterrence as the paramount sentencing principles for sexual offences against children, particularly where the offender occupies a position of trust.

Considering the seriousness of the conduct, the victim impact statement, and the limited mitigating factors, the court determined the appropriate range to be five to six years’ imprisonment.

A global sentence of five years’ imprisonment was imposed along with DNA, firearms prohibition, and lifetime sex offender registry orders.

The accused was convicted after trial of sexual assault contrary to s. 271 of the Criminal Code for kissing and groping the complainant at a Royal Canadian Legion branch.

At sentencing, the court considered the offender’s advanced age, lack of prior criminal record, health issues, and military service history, alongside the significant emotional and financial impact on the complainant reflected in a victim impact statement.

The court emphasized denunciation and general deterrence as primary sentencing principles under s. 718 of the Criminal Code but concluded that a custodial sentence was not necessary in the circumstances.

The court imposed a non‑custodial sentence consisting of 24 months’ probation with multiple conditions, a 20‑year Sex Offender Registry order, a primary DNA order, a five‑year firearms prohibition, community service, and the statutory victim fine surcharge.

A young offender, aged 17 at the time of the offences, was convicted of two counts of attempted murder and one count of sexual assault following a brutal home invasion.

The offender was sentenced as an adult pursuant to the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

The court imposed concurrent sentences of eight years for the attempted murder counts and five years for the sexual assault count, with enhanced presentence custody credit of 1.5 to 1 (36 months total).

The court balanced adult sentencing principles with youth criminal justice considerations, emphasizing rehabilitation while addressing denunciation and deterrence.

Ancillary orders included SOIRA registration, DNA order, firearms prohibition, and communication prohibition with victims.

A 20-year-old first-time offender pleaded guilty to assault with a weapon and dangerous driving arising from an incident on the Gardiner Expressway in which he displayed a BB gun at another vehicle, causing the other driver to swerve and nearly collide with other vehicles.

The Crown sought four to six months custody plus ancillary orders.

The defence sought an absolute discharge.

The court granted an absolute discharge on both counts, finding that the offender's momentary lapse in judgment was completely out of character, that he presented a low risk of recidivism, and that the ancillary orders provided sufficient protection for the public interest.

The offender pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking after being arrested with approximately 253 grams of cocaine, additional controlled substances, and cash.

The court considered aggravating factors including the significant quantity of cocaine and the offender’s role as a courier in a commercial trafficking operation.

Mitigating factors included the offender’s guilty plea, lack of prior criminal record, cooperation with police, and rehabilitative prospects.

Balancing denunciation and general deterrence against the offender’s youth and rehabilitation potential, the court imposed a custodial sentence followed by probation.

Additional ancillary orders included forfeiture of seized items and a firearms prohibition, while a DNA order was declined.

The accused pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography and careless storage of ammunition.

The Crown sought imprisonment of four to six months followed by three years probation.

Defence counsel sought 90 days intermittent imprisonment.

The court imposed 90 days intermittent imprisonment (served weekends over approximately 30 weeks), three years probation with strict conditions including house arrest during the intermittent sentence, a DNA order, Sex Offender Information Registration Act compliance for 10 years, a 10-year prohibition on accessing children under 16, forfeiture of computer equipment and media, a $500 fine for the ammunition charge, and a 10-year firearms prohibition.

The court balanced the seriousness of the offence against mitigating factors including the accused's otherwise good character, genuine remorse, engagement in counselling, guilty plea, and impact on his family.

The accused pleaded guilty to seven counts of theft under $5,000, committed through shoplifting to finance an Oxycontin addiction.

Following his initial release and subsequent bail violation, he pleaded guilty to additional charges including failing to attend court and breach of recognizance.

The central issue at sentencing was the quantum of jail time and the credit to be granted for pre-sentence custody, particularly regarding enhanced credit under section 719(3.1) of the Criminal Code.

The court imposed a sentence permitting the accused to access drug treatment at Westover Treatment Centre.

The accused pleaded guilty to aggravated assault after a sudden and unprovoked knife attack on a stranger at a public gym.

The court considered the seriousness of the offence, the victim impact, and the offender’s personal circumstances including a history of depression, substance abuse, and psychological stressors.

Psychiatric evidence indicated that while the offender had a major depressive disorder, it was likely in remission and did not significantly mitigate moral blameworthiness.

Emphasizing denunciation and deterrence for a vicious public attack with a weapon, the court determined that a fit sentence would have been 4½ years’ imprisonment.

After granting limited enhanced credit for pre-sentence custody, the court imposed a custodial sentence of 36 months.