Following a jury conviction for aggravated assault arising from the discharge of a loaded handgun in an apartment, the court was required to resolve disputed sentencing facts.
Applying the post-verdict fact-finding framework, the court rejected the Crown's theory of an intentional shooting and found that the accused produced the gun to scare others and that it discharged unintentionally while being removed from a bag.
The court held that the Bellissimo range for intentional gun violence did not apply and fixed the appropriate range for serious injury caused by the unintentional discharge of an illegally possessed firearm at three to seven years.
Considering catastrophic injuries to the victim, the accused's youth, lack of record, remorse, rehabilitation prospects, collateral immigration consequences, and concurrency with an earlier firearm sentence, the court imposed 21 months' imprisonment after credit, followed by 12 months' probation and ancillary orders.
