Michael DelGobbo

The accused pleaded guilty to possession of 214 grams of opium for the purpose of trafficking.

He was a first-time offender who had been addicted to opium and possessed it for personal use rather than commercial gain.

The Crown sought a 24-month conditional sentence, while the defence sought a discharge to prevent a criminal record that would bar the accused from working in the trucking industry.

The court granted a conditional discharge with 18 months of probation, finding it was in the accused's best interests and not contrary to the public interest, given his lack of criminal record, good prospects for rehabilitation, and the impact a conviction would have on his employment.

The three accused were charged with conspiracy to traffic cocaine, trafficking cocaine, and possession of proceeds of crime following an RCMP undercover operation.

The Crown's case relied heavily on voice identification evidence from intercepted communications to link the accused Shanker to the conspiracy.

The court found the voice identification evidence unreliable due to cross-racial identification issues, expectation bias, and the poor quality of the recordings.

Without reliable voice identification, the circumstantial evidence of the accused's presence at the warehouse was insufficient to prove their involvement in the drug trafficking scheme beyond a reasonable doubt.

All accused were acquitted of the cocaine-related charges.

Pawar conceded guilt to a separate charge of possessing opium for the purpose of trafficking.

The Crown brought a bail review after the accused, an American national, was released on bail following his arrest at the border for smuggling three handguns and ammunition in hidden compartments.

The reviewing judge found that the initial justice gave excessive weight to the accused's lack of a criminal record and insufficient weight to the seriousness of the offence and the strong probability of conviction.

The court concluded that detention was necessary to maintain confidence in the administration of justice under the tertiary ground.

The release order was vacated and the accused was ordered detained.

The accused brought a motion to quash a search warrant and exclude evidence under s. 24(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, arguing that the Information to Obtain (ITO) contained misleading information and material omissions.

The warrant authorized a search of the accused’s rural property, resulting in the seizure of marijuana plants, firearms, and other drug-related items.

The court applied the Garofoli framework to assess whether the issuing justice could have granted the authorization based on the record, including information provided by multiple confidential informants.

The court found the informants’ information to be credible, mutually corroborative, and sufficiently detailed to establish reasonable and probable grounds.

The motion to quash the warrant and exclude the evidence was dismissed.