A. Alawi

The offender pleaded guilty to simple assault and unlawful confinement after assisting the primary perpetrator in dragging a vulnerable, exploited woman out of a hotel and into a vehicle.

The Crown sought 4 to 6 months in custody, while the defence sought a non-custodial sentence.

The court considered the offender's status as a vulnerable Black female who had experienced racism, her history of exploitation by the primary perpetrator, and her genuine remorse.

The court imposed a suspended sentence with 3 years of probation, 180 hours of community service, and ancillary orders, finding that a non-custodial sentence was fit given the unique mitigating circumstances.

Sentencing of three offenders for criminal organization and firearms offences, with one offender also sentenced for human trafficking and assault causing bodily harm.

The court imposed a 12-year sentence for the principal offender involved in human trafficking and firearms acquisition for the criminal organization, a 7-year sentence for the second offender recruited to obtain firearms, and a 2.5-year sentence for the third offender who acted as a go-between.

The court applied enhanced pre-sentence custody credits for harsh detention conditions and strict house arrest.

The offender, a 19-year-old first offender, was convicted of robbery, being disguised with intent, and dangerous driving following a home invasion where he and three others forced their way into an apartment while masked and armed with knives.

He later fled police, driving dangerously.

The court weighed the serious aggravating factors of the home invasion against the offender's youth, lack of record, and supportive family.

The court imposed a total sentence of 3 years in custody, prioritizing denunciation and deterrence.

Accused charged with cocaine trafficking offences sought a Rowbotham order staying proceedings pending state-funded counsel, arguing they lacked the financial means to retain counsel and required representation for a fair trial.

The court reviewed the established Rowbotham criteria requiring denial of legal aid, inability to afford counsel, and necessity of counsel for a fair trial.

The court found the first accused failed to provide credible or sufficient evidence of indigence and demonstrated access to significant income and discretionary spending inconsistent with financial hardship.

The second accused had been granted a legal aid certificate but sought funding for counsel of choice, which did not meet the Rowbotham threshold.

The court further held that the applicants failed to establish that the case involved sufficient complexity to require state-funded counsel.

The offender pleaded guilty to recklessly discharging a firearm, possessing a loaded prohibited firearm, and possessing an over-capacity magazine after firing shots in a residential complex.

He brought a Charter challenge arguing the five-year mandatory minimum sentence under s. 244.2(3)(a)(i) of the Criminal Code constituted cruel and unusual punishment.

The court dismissed the constitutional challenge, finding the sentence was not grossly disproportionate given the gravity of the offence and the risk to the public.

The offender was sentenced to the mandatory minimum of five years, reduced to two years net after credit for pre-trial custody.