Dean Paquette

The applicant, charged with numerous drug trafficking and organized crime offences, sought a bail review under s. 520(1) of the Criminal Code to vacate a detention order.

The applicant argued the justice of the peace erred in law by rejecting the proposed sureties and conflating drug trafficking with trafficking for a criminal organization.

The Superior Court found no error in law, noting the overwhelming evidence of the applicant's high-ranking position in a mafia organization and the massive scale of the drug transactions.

The court upheld the detention on both the secondary and tertiary grounds, concluding that release would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

The accused was charged with three counts of possession of stolen property after purchasing a dump trailer, a cargo trailer, and a skid steer from an individual known only as 'Chico'.

The accused claimed he did not know the items were stolen and believed he was getting a good deal from a man hiding assets during a divorce.

The court rejected the accused's evidence, finding him unreliable and noting numerous 'red flags' such as unreasonably low prices, missing VIN plates, and the accused's fraudulent registration of the trailers as home-made.

The court concluded the accused was willfully blind to the origins of the property and found him guilty on all counts.

The appellant appealed his conviction and sentence for uttering threats against a child welfare worker and others.

At trial, the appellant denied the encounter and presented an alibi defence, which the trial judge rejected, applying the W.(D.) framework.

The Court of Appeal found no error in the trial judge's assessment of credibility, rejection of the alibi, or application of the standard of proof.

The court also upheld the sentence of 60 days' imprisonment followed by two years' probation, finding that the trial judge appropriately considered the appellant's Aboriginal status and the principles of denunciation and deterrence.

The Canadian Foundation for Children Youth and the Law brought a motion for leave to intervene as a friend of the court in an appeal involving a young person.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario granted the motion, subject to conditions including that the moving party take the record as it exists, file a factum of no more than 20 pages, and make oral argument of no more than 30 minutes.

The moving party was also permitted to reference the Convention on the Rights of the Child and other international treaties ratified by Canada.

The Crown appealed a sentence imposed for widespread internet distribution of child pornography.

The sentencing judge had imposed a 90-day custodial term, substantially below the range he identified, primarily to avoid disrupting the respondent's academic progress.

Fresh evidence established that the sentencing judge had been materially misled about the respondent's university enrolment, academic achievements, and standing.

The Court of Appeal held there was no basis to depart from the 12- to 15-month range identified at first instance and varied the sentence to 12 months, crediting time already served.

The Crown sought leave to appeal from a summary conviction appeal decision that had granted a Charter application and awarded $5,000 in costs after an unsuccessful firearm storage prosecution.

The Court of Appeal held that the summary conviction appeal court had jurisdiction because a Charter claim had been raised and either determined or left undecided at trial, engaging the appeal right under s. 830(1) of the Criminal Code.

However, the court found no evidentiary basis for concluding that the Crown's conduct in proceeding to trial was egregious, oppressive, or high-handed so as to constitute a breach of s. 7 or justify a remedy under s. 24(1).

The court also held that the record could not support an award of costs under s. 809(1), and set aside the costs order.