M. Hourigan

The accused pleaded guilty to trafficking restricted and prohibited firearms, possessing proceeds of crime over $5,000, and trafficking fentanyl.

The sentencing judge imposed a global sentence of 11 years, reduced by 2.5 years for prolonged and unacceptable pre-trial custody conditions including extensive lockdowns and triple bunking, and further reduced by Summers credit of 3.6 years for 874 non-lockdown days of pre-trial custody.

Mitigating factors included no prior criminal record, relative youth, genuine remorse, strong rehabilitative potential, and systemic disadvantage as a Black man raised in poverty with significant personal losses.

Aggravating factors included the deadly combination of fentanyl and firearms trafficking repeated over several months for profit, and the theft of police buy money.

The court also considered the collateral consequence of likely deportation and its impact on rehabilitation and family separation.

The remaining sentence to be served is 1,791 days (approximately 4.9 years).

During a jury trial for importing a controlled substance, the accused brought a Corbett application to prevent the Crown from cross-examining her on a prior conviction for unlawful possession of an identity document.

The court weighed the factors, noting the prior conviction was a crime of dishonesty highly relevant to credibility, not overly remote, and dissimilar to the current charge.

The court dismissed the application, finding the probative value outweighed the prejudicial impact, and held that a limiting instruction to the jury would adequately protect the accused's right to a fair trial.

The offender was found guilty by a jury of importing 11.95 kilograms of heroin into Canada.

He acted as a courier, concealing the drugs in his suitcases.

The Crown sought a 20-year sentence, while the defence argued for 12 years, emphasizing the low purity of the heroin and the offender's status as a first-time federal offender.

The court applied the Sidhu range for heroin importation, rejecting the argument that low purity alone justified a sentence at the bottom of the range.

The offender was sentenced to 14.5 years in custody, less credit for pre-sentence custody.

Accused charged with cocaine trafficking offences sought a Rowbotham order staying proceedings pending state-funded counsel, arguing they lacked the financial means to retain counsel and required representation for a fair trial.

The court reviewed the established Rowbotham criteria requiring denial of legal aid, inability to afford counsel, and necessity of counsel for a fair trial.

The court found the first accused failed to provide credible or sufficient evidence of indigence and demonstrated access to significant income and discretionary spending inconsistent with financial hardship.

The second accused had been granted a legal aid certificate but sought funding for counsel of choice, which did not meet the Rowbotham threshold.

The court further held that the applicants failed to establish that the case involved sufficient complexity to require state-funded counsel.