M.G.J. Quigley

The applicant sought an extension of time to appeal his 2017 convictions, arguing his guilty pleas were uninformed because he was unaware they would render him inadmissible to Canada.

The court dismissed the application, finding it moot because the Immigration Appeal Division had recently granted a conditional stay of his removal order.

The court also noted the application would have been dismissed regardless due to the applicant's significant delay in bringing the application and serious credibility issues with his evidence.

During a jury trial for sexual assault and sexual interference involving a minor complainant, the Crown called the complainant's mother to testify.

In response to a question from the Crown, the mother stated that she believed the allegations because her daughter would never lie about something like that.

The defence moved for a mistrial on the basis that this constituted inadmissible oath-helping evidence.

The court granted the motion, finding that the mother's statement caused irremediable prejudice to the accused that could not be cured by a limiting instruction to the jury.

The applicant sought a bail review under section 521 of the Criminal Code to vacate a detention order.

He argued that the initial justice made factual errors and that the proposed new surety's state of knowledge regarding a search warrant execution constituted a material change in circumstances.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the application, finding no material change in circumstances and agreeing with the initial justice that there remained a substantial risk of the applicant reoffending.

Sentencing following jury convictions for possession of prohibited substances and possession of MDMA/methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking.

Police stopped the accused for Highway Traffic Act concerns and discovered 1,077 ecstasy pills with an estimated street value between approximately $10,770 and $21,540, along with smaller quantities of other drugs.

The offender had a lengthy criminal record including drug offences, breaches of court orders, and domestic assaults, and had demonstrated poor compliance with community supervision.

The court held that denunciation and deterrence were paramount in serious trafficking offences and that a conditional sentence was inappropriate given the offender’s history and the quantity of drugs involved.

A global penitentiary sentence of 2.5 years was imposed with ancillary DNA and forfeiture orders.