4 total
Bail review dismissed; continued detention justified on secondary and tertiary grounds due to repeated breaches.
The applicant, facing multiple serious charges including drug trafficking and flight from police, applied for a bail review under s. 520 of the Criminal Code.
The Crown conceded a material change in circumstances, prompting a de novo hearing.
The court found that the applicant, who had repeatedly breached previous release conditions, posed a substantial risk of reoffending that could not be adequately managed by the proposed release plan, which included GPS monitoring and his parents as sureties.
The application was dismissed, with the court concluding that continued detention was justified on both the secondary and tertiary grounds.
Defendants' motions for a stay under s. 11(a) of the Charter, particulars, and quashing for limitation period expiry dismissed.
The defendants, charged with zoning bylaw infractions, brought several in-trial motions.
They sought a stay of proceedings under s. 24(1) of the Charter, arguing their s. 11(a) rights were infringed because the counts lacked an essential averment specifying the 'wrongful use' of the land, and the prosecution refused to provide formal particulars.
The court dismissed the Charter motion and the alternative motion for particulars, finding the defendants were sufficiently informed of the specific offence through disclosure and pre-trial discussions.
The court also dismissed a motion to quash count #1 for being laid outside the 6-month limitation period, noting the limitation period was suspended by O. Reg. 73/20 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Finally, the court addressed disclosure requests, ordering the prosecution to review and provide McNeil disclosure if relevant, and to provide redacted notes of the complaint, while denying requests for the investigator's CV and the complainant's name based on informer privilege.
Accused found not criminally responsible for manslaughter of his father due to schizoaffective disorder.
The accused was charged with manslaughter after killing his father and setting the body on fire in a vehicle.
The accused had a lengthy history of mental illness and was experiencing severe delusions at the time, believing his father was an alien trying to kill him.
Relying on expert psychiatric evidence, the court found that the accused suffered from a schizoaffective disorder that rendered him incapable of knowing his actions were morally wrong.
The accused was found not criminally responsible (NCR) and the matter was referred to the Ontario Review Board.
Bail review dismissed; detention upheld on secondary and tertiary grounds for violent kidnapping and assault.
The accused, charged with kidnapping, robbery, aggravated assault, forcible confinement, and attempted murder, applied for a review of a detention order.
The reviewing judge applied the deferential standard of review from St-Cloud, finding no error in the Justice of the Peace's admission of a co-accused's statement or the evaluation of the proposed sureties.
The court upheld the detention on both the secondary ground, citing concerns about the accused's stability following a random and inexplicable attack, and the tertiary ground, given the violent nature of the crime, overwhelming evidence, and vulnerability of the victim.
The bail review was dismissed.
