Mark Andrew Czerkawski

The applicant, having pleaded guilty to manslaughter, sought interim release pending sentencing.

The court considered the release plan, including electronic monitoring and cultural supports, against the applicant's lengthy criminal record, history of non-compliance, and the serious nature of the offence.

Despite the principles favouring release for Aboriginal accused and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the court found that detention was justified on both secondary (public safety) and tertiary (maintaining confidence in the administration of justice) grounds.

The court endorsed previous findings that the applicant's history of re-offending and non-compliance outweighed the proposed supervision plan.

The defendant sought a bail review after being denied bail by a Justice of the Peace.

He was charged with robbery, disguise with intent, dangerous driving, possession for the purpose of trafficking, and failing to comply with release conditions.

The defendant proposed a new release plan including his mother as surety for a higher amount, residing at her home, GPS monitoring, and drug counselling.

The court found that the new evidence, including GPS monitoring, constituted a material relevant change in circumstances, triggering a review.

However, the court ultimately found that the defendant failed to discharge the reverse onus on both secondary and tertiary grounds, given his serious criminal record, long-standing drug addiction, past breaches, and the escalating nature of his criminal activity.

The application for bail review was dismissed.

The defendant pleaded guilty to robbery with an imitation firearm and challenged the constitutionality of the mandatory minimum sentence under s. 85 of the Criminal Code, arguing it violated s. 12 of the Charter.

The court applied the R. v. Nur framework, determined a proportionate sentence of five months' incarceration, and found that the mandatory minimum of one year consecutive (resulting in a 17-month sentence after considering pre-trial credit) was grossly disproportionate, thus violating the defendant's s. 12 Charter rights.

The mandatory minimum was declared of no force and effect, and a sentence of 5 months imprisonment (less 38 days credit) plus probation was imposed.