Lynn Shirreffs

The 14-year-old accused pleaded guilty to first degree murder after fatally stabbing a 15-year-old fellow resident at a group foster home.

The Crown and defence jointly submitted that the maximum youth sentence of 10 years should be imposed, with no credit for pre-disposition custody.

The court accepted the joint submission, noting the horrific circumstances of the unprovoked attack, the accused's history of violent behaviour, and his significant psychiatric conditions.

The accused was sentenced to six years in custody followed by four years of conditional supervision in the community.

The accused pleaded guilty to armed robbery and possession of a loaded restricted firearm after robbing a victim of his truck at gunpoint in his driveway.

The court accepted a joint submission, weighing the serious aggravating factors of gun violence against the mitigating factors of a guilty plea, youth, lack of adult record, and positive rehabilitative prospects.

The accused was sentenced to 4 years' imprisonment, reduced to 3.5 years after credit for pre-trial custody and strict bail conditions.

The accused pleaded guilty to a gunpoint robbery of a man in his truck, along with related offences.

The accused had a significant youth record including two prior robberies.

The court accepted a joint submission, sentencing the accused to 5 years in custody, less 2 years of enhanced credit for pre-trial custody, leaving 3 years to serve.

Concurrent sentences were imposed for the other counts, along with DNA and weapons prohibition orders.

The offender pled guilty to breaching his Long Term Supervision Order (LTSO) by leaving his halfway house for ten days, and to breaching his recognizance of bail.

This was his third conviction for breaching the LTSO.

The Crown sought a sentence of 36 to 42 months, while the defence sought time served.

The court weighed the offender's history of non-compliance against his completion of the LTSO and lack of new substantive offences.

The court imposed a high-end reformatory sentence of 20 months (satisfied by time served plus one day) and 12 months of probation.

The defendant, Kafaru Mustafa, pleaded guilty to one count of Fraud Over $5,000 related to a "Black Money Scam." Despite initial denials in the Presentence Report, the defendant reaffirmed his guilty plea after a further plea inquiry, understanding the implications of a criminal record.

The Crown recommended a suspended sentence with probation and restitution, which the court accepted, considering the defendant's first-time offender status, remorse, and willingness to make restitution.

The accused, an inmate at a correctional centre, pleaded guilty to aggravated assault after viciously attacking his cellmate while intoxicated on 'home brew'.

The victim suffered significant injuries including facial fractures.

The court weighed the multiplicity of aggravating factors, including the accused's prior record and the vulnerability of the confined victim, against the mitigating factor of the guilty plea.

Applying the principle of totality, the court imposed a sentence of 4 years consecutive to the sentence the accused was already serving, less 18 months credit for pre-sentence custody, resulting in a net sentence of 2.5 years consecutive.

The accused, a 21-year-old first offender, pleaded guilty to robbery, possession of an unlicensed shotgun, and pointing a firearm following a home invasion.

The accused and two accomplices entered a residence armed with loaded firearms, a baton, and pepper spray, assaulting the occupants.

While on bail, the accused cut off his GPS ankle bracelet and absconded, leading to a conviction for breach of recognizance.

The court sentenced the accused to a global term of 5 years in the penitentiary, emphasizing denunciation and deterrence for violent home invasions.

The court partially denied enhanced credit for pre-sentence custody due to the flagrant bail breach, resulting in a net sentence of 3 years and 20 days.

The applicant pleaded guilty to robbery and firearm offences and awaited sentencing.

He brought a constitutional challenge against the bail misconduct exclusion in s. 719(3.1) of the Criminal Code, which restricts pre-sentence custody credit to a 1:1 ratio for offenders whose bail was cancelled due to misconduct.

The applicant argued the provision violated s. 7 of the Charter.

The court found that the provision engages the liberty interest and is overbroad, as it captures individuals whose misconduct does not render them a threat to public safety.

The Crown conceded the infringement could not be saved under s. 1.

The court declared the bail misconduct prong of s. 719(3.1) of no force and effect.

The offender pleaded guilty to two counts of robbery of gas stations and one count of breach of undertaking.

During both robberies, the offender disguised herself and pretended to have a firearm.

The court considered the offender's aboriginal background, drug addiction, and mental health issues, as well as the aggravating factors of committing the offences while on probation and release.

The court imposed a global sentence of 30 months in custody, less pre-sentence custody credit.

Steven Byford pleaded guilty to aggravated assault of Darryl MacDougall, his mother's domestic partner, following a domestic argument where Byford stabbed MacDougall three times with a steak knife.

The court considered aggravating factors including the use of a weapon, multiple stab wounds, and the domestic context, alongside significant mitigating factors such as Byford's guilty plea, youth, lack of prior record, positive pre-sentence report, and low risk of reoffending.

The court imposed a custodial sentence of 16 months in jail, followed by two years of probation, a DNA order, and a weapons prohibition order, balancing denunciation and deterrence with the offender's rehabilitative potential and psychological vulnerabilities.

A 17.5-year-old young person pleaded guilty to second-degree murder.

The court was tasked with determining whether to impose an adult or youth sentence under the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA).

The Crown sought an adult sentence of life imprisonment, while the defence argued for a youth sentence comprising time served and conditional supervision.

The court considered the seriousness of the offence, the young person's background (including a toxic relationship with the victim, substance abuse, and the impact of her mother's death), and her significant rehabilitative progress while in custody.

Professional assessments unanimously recommended a youth sentence, citing the young person's developmental vulnerability and the potential negative impact of an adult correctional facility.

Applying the YCJA's principles of accountability, rehabilitation, and reintegration, the court found that a youth sentence of sufficient length would hold the young person accountable.

Consequently, the Crown's application for an adult sentence was dismissed, and a youth sentence of seven years was imposed, consisting of four years in custody (crediting three years for pre-sentencing detention plus one additional year) followed by three years of conditional supervision, along with a weapons prohibition order.

This decision outlines the sentencing of Erik Johnson for a serious violent offence that resulted in life-threatening injuries to the victim.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the offender's extensive criminal record with prior violence and issues with self-control.

Mitigating factors included a guilty plea, expressed remorse, and efforts to address substance abuse.

A high-end reformatory sentence of 19 months in jail was imposed, with credit for 12 months of pre-sentencing custody, followed by 18 months of probation with specific conditions, a DNA order, and a weapons prohibition order.

The accused, Erik Johnson, was sentenced for a serious offence that caused life-threatening injuries to the victim.

The court considered the accused's long criminal record, including previous acts of violence, as an aggravating factor, noting issues with self-control and anger.

Mitigating factors included a guilty plea, expression of remorse, and efforts to address a substance abuse problem.

The court imposed a high-end reformatory sentence of 19 months in jail, with credit for 12 months of pre-sentencing custody, followed by 18 months of probation with specific conditions, a DNA order, and a weapons prohibition order.

The offender was convicted after a jury trial of sexual interference involving a person under the age of 16, arising from repeated acts of sexual intercourse during overnight visits at the offender’s home.

The court considered aggravating factors including repeated sexual acts, the vulnerability of the complainant, manipulation, and a breach of trust arising from the offender’s role as a family friend and host while the complainant babysat.

Mitigating factors included the offender’s lack of prior criminal record, strong employment history, family responsibilities, and compliance with bail conditions.

Applying the sentencing principles in ss. 718, 718.1, and 718.2 of the Criminal Code and emphasizing denunciation and deterrence, the court concluded that a penitentiary term was required within a range of two to five years.

A sentence of two and a half years’ imprisonment was imposed with credit for pre-sentence custody and multiple ancillary orders.

The accused pleaded guilty to multiple sexual offences including attempting to administer a stupefying substance to facilitate sexual assault, attempted sexual assault, attempted making of child pornography, voyeurism, and possession of child pornography.

The offences involved attempts to intoxicate a teenage complainant and long‑term covert recordings of minors in a bathroom, along with possession of a large child pornography collection.

The court emphasized denunciation and deterrence as the primary sentencing objectives given the seriousness of child exploitation offences and the abuse of trust.

Numerous aggravating factors were identified, including planning, the vulnerability of victims under 18, abuse of familial trust, and significant psychological harm to victims.

Accepting a joint submission, the court imposed concurrent penitentiary terms resulting in a total sentence of three years, along with weapons prohibitions, lifetime SOIRA registration, and DNA orders.