Kristen Mohr

The appellant pleaded guilty to impaired driving, drug trafficking, and firearms offences, and was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment just before the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown.

On appeal, he sought a sentence reduction based on the totality principle and the harsh conditions of incarceration caused by the pandemic.

The Crown and the appellant agreed to an 18-month sentence reduction.

The Court of Appeal accepted the joint proposal, finding that the pandemic resulted in significantly harsher conditions than anticipated at sentencing, and reduced the sentence by 18 months.

The accused applied for a bail review.

In this addendum to the original reasons, the court amended the terms of release on consent of the parties.

The accused was granted judicial interim release upon entering into a $50,000 recognizance with one named surety and subject to various conditions, including house arrest, a weapons prohibition, and a non-communication order.

The accused applied for a bail review under s. 520 of the Criminal Code after spending 32 months in pre-trial custody on charges including drug trafficking and participating in a criminal organization.

The court found that the lengthy pre-trial custody constituted a material change in circumstances justifying a review of the initial detention order.

The court concluded that the proposed strict release plan, supervised by a reliable surety, adequately addressed the secondary ground for detention.

The accused was ordered released on a $50,000 recognizance with strict conditions.

The accused was tried on eight cocaine and marihuana trafficking, possession for the purpose of trafficking, and conspiracy counts arising from encrypted BlackBerry communications and a seized box of drugs.

The court found the Crown proved the identity of the coded communicators and accepted expert interpretation of the street-language messages.

On the cocaine transaction, the court held the evidence established a conspiracy and trafficking arrangement with an intermediary, together with possession for the purpose of trafficking, but not a conspiracy with the upstream seller because the evidence showed only a simple purchase and sale.

On the '18 box' evidence, the court convicted on the marihuana trafficking and conspiracy counts but acquitted on the related cocaine allegations because knowledge of the cocaine in the box was not proved.