Mathew Friedberg

The accused, Tryden Reis, was found guilty of aggravated assault, discharging a firearm with intent to wound, and using a firearm during aggravated assault.

The Crown sought a sentence of five to six years, noting the four-year mandatory minimum for discharging a firearm with intent to wound under s. 244(2)(b) of the Criminal Code.

Reis challenged the constitutionality of this mandatory minimum sentence under section 12 of the Charter, arguing it constituted cruel and unusual punishment.

The court applied the Nur/Lloyd two-step test, finding the mandatory minimum sentence was not grossly disproportionate, both generally and in the specific circumstances of the accused and reasonable hypotheticals.

The constitutional challenge was dismissed.

The court imposed a global sentence of six years imprisonment, concurrent for aggravated assault and discharging a firearm with intent to wound.

Credit for pre-sentence custody (45 days at 1.5:1, totaling 68 days) and house arrest (just under four months) was awarded, reducing the total sentence to five and a half years.

The charge of using a firearm during aggravated assault was stayed.

A DNA sample order and a lifetime weapons prohibition order were also made.

The Crown sought certiorari with mandamus in aid to quash a preliminary inquiry judge's order discharging the respondent on various firearms, ammunition, and drug offences.

The Superior Court found that the preliminary inquiry judge committed jurisdictional error by repeatedly assuming the role of the trier of fact, weighing evidence, drawing factual inferences, and failing to consider the circumstantial evidence cumulatively.

The preliminary inquiry judge had discounted individual pieces of evidence and failed to assess whether a reasonable jury, properly instructed, could convict.

The Superior Court quashed the discharge and ordered the preliminary inquiry judge to commit the respondent to stand trial on the specified charges.

A preliminary inquiry into charges of possession of firearms without a license and careless storage of firearms and ammunition.

Police executed a search warrant at a residence and found two firearms and ammunition hidden in various locations within the basement and main living area.

The accused was found in the basement in his underwear near a couch.

The Crown sought to establish constructive possession through circumstantial evidence, including the accused's proximity to the basement, personal documents bearing his name found in a safe, and scales and a cell phone near where he was found.

The court discharged the accused on all counts, finding that the Crown had failed to establish sufficient evidence that a properly instructed jury could reasonably infer the accused had knowledge of or control over the firearms.