M. De Rubeis

The accused was convicted of sexual assault following a trial.

The Crown sought a custodial sentence of 9 to 12 months, while the defence sought a conditional sentence.

The court imposed a custodial sentence of 90 days to be served intermittently, followed by one year of probation with conditions including no contact with the victim, attendance at sexual offender treatment, and a 500-meter exclusion zone.

The court found that while the conditions for a conditional sentence were technically met, the gravity of the offence and the need for denunciation and deterrence required incarceration.

The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle with excess blood alcohol.

The Crown obtained a roadside breath sample via an Approved Screening Device following a traffic stop.

The defence challenged whether the demand was made "forthwith" as required by section 254(2) of the Criminal Code and whether the accused's Charter rights to counsel were violated.

The trial judge found that an informal demand was made within seconds of the officer forming reasonable suspicion, followed by a formal demand minutes later.

The delay in administering the test was found to be reasonably necessary given the time required to obtain the screening device.

The accused's right to counsel was not violated as there was insufficient time to realistically consult counsel before the test.

The trial judge convicted the accused.

The accused pleaded guilty to aggravated assault following a violent altercation in which he struck the victim multiple times with a homemade axe, causing compound fractures to both arms and multiple lacerations.

The sentencing judge imposed a custodial sentence of 33 months after considering the severity of injuries, the nature of the attack, the accused's criminal history including prior alcohol-related offences, and mitigating factors including family support and work history.

The court rejected the Crown's submission for 4 years and the defence submission for 18 months to 2 years less a day, finding that a penitentiary-length sentence was necessary to adequately denounce the offender's moral blameworthiness and address principles of deterrence.