Mitchell Flagg

The accused, the former Executive Director of a non-profit charity, was charged with fraud over $5,000 and breach of probation.

The Crown alleged he used corporate credit cards and cheques for unauthorized personal expenses, including hotels, sports equipment, and cash advances, totaling over $60,000.

The accused argued he had discretion over business expenses and that the Crown failed to prove the expenses were personal.

The court rejected the accused's arguments, finding the direct and circumstantial evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the transactions were unauthorized personal expenses.

The accused was found guilty on both counts.

The offender was convicted of fraud over $5,000 after defrauding a woman he met on a dating website of $595,000.

He used a false surname and convinced her to invest in a fictitious internet app and second mortgages, but instead used the funds for personal expenses, gambling debts, and restitution for a prior fraud conviction.

The court found the offender's actions highly exploitative and noted his extensive related criminal record.

The court sentenced the offender to 6 years' imprisonment, less 462 days of pre-trial custody credit, and ordered restitution and a fine in lieu of forfeiture, each in the amount of $558,456.

The applicant, who had been convicted of fraud, applied to reopen a stay of proceedings application based on alleged Charter violations.

He argued that his s. 8 rights were violated by the frequent and allegedly public manner of strip searches while in pre-trial custody, and that his s. 7 rights were violated by the previous Crown counsel's refusal to consent to an adjournment amidst late disclosure.

The court dismissed the application, finding that the strip searches were conducted in accordance with policy and justified by institutional security concerns, and that the Crown's conduct did not amount to bad faith or shock the conscience of the community.

The court concluded that this was not one of the clearest of cases warranting the extraordinary remedy of a stay of proceedings.

The applicant was found guilty of fraud over $5,000.

In the same reasons for judgment, the trial judge dismissed the applicant's pre-trial application for a stay of proceedings based on alleged abuse of process by correctional officers, without allowing a full evidentiary record.

The applicant brought an application for a mistrial, arguing the denial of procedural fairness gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias tainting the entire proceeding.

The court dismissed the mistrial application, finding no reasonable apprehension of bias and concluding that re-opening the stay application to allow a full evidentiary record was the appropriate and proportionate remedy.

The appellant pleaded guilty to impaired operation and dangerous driving and was sentenced to three years' probation, fines, and consecutive driving prohibitions totaling five years.

He appealed the driving prohibition as demonstrably unfit.

The Crown conceded the consecutive prohibitions were an error.

The Superior Court of Justice found that the sentencing judge overemphasized denunciation, noting the appellant's lack of prior record, glowing pre-sentence report, and successful rehabilitation efforts.

The appeal was allowed and the driving prohibition was reduced to a total of two years.

The offender, a former financial advisor, was convicted of Fraud Over $5,000 for operating a Ponzi-type scheme over eight years, defrauding multiple victims, many of whom were friends or elderly clients.

The court found the offender's breach of trust and the devastating financial and emotional impact on the victims to be significant aggravating factors.

The offender was sentenced to four years' imprisonment, ordered to pay restitution of $109,150, and issued a fine in lieu of forfeiture in the same amount, with six years to pay following his release.