Melisa Montemurro

Following jury convictions for manslaughter, robbery, unlawful confinement, and use of an imitation firearm arising from a fatal robbery, the court determined a dangerous offender application under the pre-July 2, 2008 regime.

The court found the statutory prerequisites for both dangerous offender and long-term offender status were met but exercised discretion to designate the offender a long-term offender.

Emphasizing denunciation, deterrence, separation, and proportionality in light of extreme aggravating factors and no mitigating factors, the court imposed concurrent custodial terms resulting in a ten-year net sentence after enhanced pre-sentence custody credit, plus a ten-year long-term supervision order.

The accused pleaded guilty to three counts of criminal negligence causing death and two counts of impaired driving causing bodily harm arising from a high-speed collision while intoxicated that killed three people and severely injured two others.

The court emphasized denunciation and general deterrence in impaired driving cases causing death, reviewing appellate authorities including R. v. Kummer and related jurisprudence.

Numerous aggravating factors were identified, including extreme speed, high blood alcohol level, multiple fatalities, severe injuries, and refusal to provide a breath sample.

Mitigating factors included youth, a guilty plea, expressions of remorse, and community support.

Applying the governing authorities, the court imposed a penitentiary sentence at the upper end of the sentencing range.

The accused applied under s.24(2) of the Charter to exclude a firearm and ammunition discovered during a vehicle search following a traffic stop.

Police officers claimed the stop was justified by observing the accused using a cellphone while driving and that the vehicle was searched as an inventory search prior to impoundment.

The court found, on a balance of probabilities, that the officers were untruthful about observing cellphone use and that the stated justification for the stop was fabricated.

This rendered the detention arbitrary under s.9 of the Charter.

Given the deliberate police misconduct, admission of the evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute, and the firearm and ammunition were excluded.