M. Boissoneault

After trial, the accused was sentenced for intimate partner violence offences involving assault, choking, pointing a loaded handgun at the complainant, unlawful firearm possession, and related breaches of court orders.

The court treated denunciation, deterrence, public protection, and proportionality as dominant objectives, while also considering youth, traumatic upbringing, anti-Black racism, harsh pre-trial custody, and immigration consequences as mitigating or collateral factors.

Applying the Kienapple principle and related charge-specific analysis, the court entered several conditional stays, one acquittal, and one dismissal on ancillary counts.

A conditional sentence order was found unavailable and fundamentally inconsistent with the seriousness of the conduct.

The court imposed a five-year global penitentiary sentence, credited pre-trial custody and harsh conditions, and made DNA, lifetime weapons prohibition, and non-communication orders.

Following a domestic incident in a crowded apartment, the accused was tried on allegations that he assaulted and choked his intimate partner, pointed a loaded handgun at her, and committed related firearms and court-order offences.

The case turned primarily on credibility.

Applying the reasonable doubt principles from Lifchus, the W.(D.) framework, and the alternative-inference analysis in Villaroman, the court accepted the complainant's account, relied on the 911 call and real evidence of the loaded handgun, and rejected the accused's explanation as contrived.

The court found no reasonable possibility that the firearm belonged to another occupant or visitor and convicted the accused of all offences charged, subject to later submissions on Kienapple.