3 total
A young Black offender convicted of drug and firearm offences received a conditional sentence after the court applied social context evidence of systemic racism.
Miykael Goodridge was found guilty of trafficking crack cocaine and firearm offences.
The court delivered reasons for sentence, considering aggravating factors (loaded firearm, probation, weapons prohibition, limited criminal record, substance nature) and mitigating factors (youth, pre-sentence custody, house arrest, strong parental support, rehabilitative potential, and moral blameworthiness mitigated by systemic anti-Black racism).
Applying the principles from R. v. Morris, the court imposed a conditional sentence of two years less a day, followed by three years of probation, emphasizing rehabilitation and addressing systemic over-incarceration of Black offenders.
The court imposed an 18-month custodial sentence and a $100,000 restitution order for a large-scale employee fraud.
The accused, a 47-year-old American permanent resident and former Chief Financial Officer of Branham Group, was convicted after trial of fraud under section 380(1)(a) of the Criminal Code.
Between December 2009 and August 2010, she wrote 16 fraudulent cheques to herself totalling $83,322.68 and 38 fraudulent cheques to her spouse totalling $110,169.90, for a total of $193,492.58 drawn from the company account.
The fraud caused significant financial and emotional harm to the business owners.
The sentencing judge imposed an 18-month custodial sentence followed by 18 months probation, with a $100,000 restitution order, balancing the serious nature of the breach of trust and large-scale fraud against the offender's medical conditions and first-time offender status.
Similar fact evidence of prior corporal discipline against another daughter was admitted at trial.
The Crown sought to introduce evidence of similar facts regarding the defendant's pattern of corporal discipline against his daughters.
The defendant was charged with assault and assault with a weapon against his daughter Médijean, allegedly occurring between January 1, 2008 and March 29, 2016.
The Crown sought to introduce testimony from the defendant's other daughter, Amivi, regarding similar beatings she experienced in Ghana before the family immigrated to Canada.
The court applied the test from R. v. Handy to determine admissibility of similar fact evidence and found that the probative value of the evidence outweighed its prejudicial effect, particularly given that the trial was before a judge alone rather than a jury.
