Robert N. Morris

The appellant appealed a sentence of 20 months imposed by the trial judge for his involvement in a commercial conspiracy.

The Court of Appeal upheld the sentence, finding that the trial judge properly considered all relevant sentencing factors, including the commercial nature of the enterprise and the appellant's level of involvement.

The court also found that the trial judge adequately considered the parity principle in distinguishing the appellant's sentence from that of a co-conspirator who received 30 months.

Sentencing for a mid-level participant in a large-scale marijuana grow operation who was convicted of production, possession for the purpose of trafficking, conspiracy to produce marijuana, and forgery.

The court rejected the Crown's characterization of the offender as the operating mind and found he acted primarily as a broker, though with significant moral culpability.

Mitigating factors included the absence of a criminal record, lack of profit, inability to pay a fine, and the court's finding that the undercover operation stimulated the enterprise, though not amounting to entrapment.

A reformatory sentence of two years less one day, reduced by 45 days' pre-trial custody credit to 22 ½ months, was imposed concurrently, with no fine and ancillary DNA and weapons prohibition orders.

The accused applied under s. 462.34(4) of the Criminal Code for the release of restrained assets to fund legal representation for pending drug charges involving large-scale marijuana grow operations.

The accused’s legal aid certificate had been cancelled after Legal Aid concluded he failed to fully disclose his financial circumstances.

The court found on a balance of probabilities that the accused had no available assets apart from property already restrained by court order and that he possessed a proprietary interest in those assets.

After considering the legal aid tariff and the anticipated length and complexity of the trial, the court authorized the release of restrained funds to pay reasonable legal expenses at the legal aid rate.

The alternative Rowbotham application for state-funded counsel was dismissed as unnecessary.