Court Information

Ontario Court of Justice

Date: August 14, 2025

Information Number: 998 22 12102998

Location: Burlington

Parties

Between:

His Majesty the King

— And —

Savion Beckford-Salmon

Counsel

For the Crown: T. Moran and A. Khoorshed

For the Accused: M. Izadi

Reasons for Sentence

Released: August 14, 2025

Justice B.G. Puddington

Contents

• OVERVIEW
• THE ENHANCED PRE-SENTENCE REPORT
• POSITIONS ON SENTENCE
• IMPACT OF THE OFFENCE ON THE COMPLAINANT
• PRINCIPLES OF SENTENCING
• THE SENTENCE

OVERVIEW

[1] On May 30, 2024, I dismissed an application pursuant to section 8 of the Charter, challenging the search warrant in this case. Following this ruling, Mr. Beckford-Salmon pled guilty before me on July 23, 2024 to one count of robbery and one count of possessing Fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking.

[2] The facts are contained in an Agreed Statement of Fact, filed as Exhibit 1. On December 5, 2022, Mr. Beckford-Salmon and another individual, while wearing masks covering their faces, broke into unit 208 at 5240 Dundas Street in the city of Burlington. The complainant, a Ms. Saipovski was asleep in the unit when the males entered. She woke up upon hearing them enter and was confronted by the males. The other male (i.e., not Mr. Beckford-Salmon), had a black firearm in his right hand, and with his left hand, motioned to Ms. Saipovski to be quiet, by putting his finger up to his lips. She instead yelled and a Mr. Thompson confronted the males. Mr. Thompson removed the bedroom door from its hinges and used it as a shield as he moved towards the assailants. This resulted in the other male, (again, not Mr. Beckford-Salmon) shooting one round from the black firearm into a wall of the unit.

[3] The police reviewed footage from the security cameras at 5240 Dundas Street. At 8:20 am on December 5, 2022 (about 26 minutes before the 911 call), a red Kia Forte Sedan with Ontario License plate CWRF043 was seen entering the parking garage at 5240 Dundas Street. It parked in one of the spots in the garage and two males were observed walking from where the KIA was parked. At 8:24 am, those same two males are seen to enter the vestibule of the building and wait about 11 minutes before finally entering the building. They are wearing dark hoodies and light coloured pants. They are both also wearing dark coloured face masks.

[4] Eventually those males are seen to enter a unit in the vicinity of unit B208 and a short time later, exit in a hurry using a nearby stairwell. At 8:46 am (around the time of the 911 call), the two males get back into the KIA Forte and drive away.

[5] Once the officers determined the license plate number, they did a Ministry of Transportation Ontario ("MTO") search and determined that the vehicle was registered to a 2010 KIA Forte in the name of "Savion Beckford-Salmon" with a date of birth of January 21, 2003. The address listed in the MTO records listed 2-2461 Whittaker Drive in Burlington. The police then got a search warrant for that address and the Kia Forte.

[6] Upon executing the search warrant on the residence and the vehicle, the police found 17.4 grams of Fentanyl packaged for sale in the center console of the vehicle.

[7] Mr. Beckford-Salmon acknowledges that he possessed the Fentanyl for the purpose of trafficking and that he entered the unit with the intent to commit robbery.

[8] After finding him guilty, his counsel requested an Enhanced Pre-Sentence Report ("EPSR"). Unfortunately, these reports take quite some time to prepare. The EPSR in this case was prepared on April 17, 2025 and submissions on sentence were not made until June 11, 2025.

THE ENHANCED PRE-SENTENCE REPORT

[9] The Enhanced Pre-Sentence Report for Mr. Beckford-Salmon was prepared by The Sentencing and Parole Project (SPP) in Toronto, Ontario. It is now Exhibit 2 on sentence. Among other things, it provides for the following:

[10] Mr. Beckford-Salmon, 22, was born in Toronto and raised primarily by his mother. He has no prior criminal record and was 19 at the time of the offences. He was raised by his mother, with limited involvement from his father and he has a younger sister and brother. He attended various schools, faced learning difficulties, and experienced racial profiling and discrimination. He also grew up in a low-income household, with his mother often relying on social assistance.

[11] Mr. Beckford-Salmon grew up in the Jane and Sheppard area of Toronto, which the report describes as a community with a strong sense of belonging, but also unfortunately exposed Mr. Beckford-Salmon to gun violence and other crime. He therefore moved with his family to Burlington, in a predominantly white neighbourhood for safety, but he then faced racial profiling and isolation.

[12] Examples of this racial profiling and isolation were self-reported by Mr. Beckford-Salmon and his mother to the person who prepared the EPSR. They included examples of how, when Mr. Beckford-Salmon still lived in the Jane and Sheppard area, he claimed that the police would follow him and his friends and ask them questions, even though they were not apparently doing anything wrong. When he moved to Burlington, Mr. Beckford-Salmon observed that the police presence was lower, and the social issues he faced in his old neighbourhood were not present. After a year, he expressed appreciation to his mother for the decision to move as he had made some friends at his new school and came to appreciate the quiet neighbourhood. He also admitted that the move disrupted the negative path that he had been at risk of taking. That being said, he still continued to experience tension with others as a result of being a young black male. One particularly alarming overt example of racism was a racial slur that was scrawled across the bathroom wall at his school. A photo of this is found in the EPSR. While it is not 100% certain it was directed at him, he was one of a few black individuals at the school and he no doubt was affected by it.

[13] Mr. Beckford-Salmon and the report also state that the robbery and selling drugs came about because he was unemployed and needed money to pay his living expenses and assist his mother. It was a way to make quick money, a situation many impoverished people experience, especially when compared to his white peers who appeared to have everything. He acknowledged, though, that if he were the victim of a robbery, he would have been terrified, and he understands now the impact his actions have had.

POSITIONS ON SENTENCE

[14] The Crown seeks a global sentence of 4 ½ years in jail, a section 109 of the Criminal Code weapons prohibition order and a DNA order. Two Crowns participated in this sentencing. Counsel for the Ministry of the Attorney General for Ontario submits that a sentence of 3-4 years for the home invasion would be appropriate, but taking into account totality, his time spent on strict bail conditions and the EPSR, a global sentence of 4 ½ years would address the necessary sentencing principles. Counsel for the Public Prosecution Service of Canada submits that a sentence of 4-4 1/2 years would be appropriate for the Fentanyl charges on their own, but resolving globally with the other charges, 3 years for the drugs, plus the 1 ½ years for the robbery would be appropriate. I will state that, given the circumstances of the attempted robbery and the amount of Fentanyl in this case, the Crown is not being unreasonable in their positions.

[15] Ms. Izadi, on behalf of Mr. Beckford Salmon, submits a sentence of 2 years less a day, but served in the community as a Conditional Sentence Order, is appropriate to address the deterrence and denunciation necessary for this offence. She takes no issue with the ancillary orders.

IMPACT OF THE OFFENCE ON THE COMPLAINANT

[16] There was no input from the victims of the attempted robbery in this case. I have no information about what the circumstances of the botched robbery were, except that Mr. Beckford-Salmon and an unknown accomplice entered the home in masks, with the accomplice carrying and actually firing the firearm. Mr. Beckford-Salmon mentions in his EPSR that he was aware that the "victim had a significant amount of money on the premises, and the money would have been enough for him to sustain his life while he continued his search for employment".

[17] Even without a Victim Impact Statement, it is clear that a home invasion by two masked men, one armed with a firearm, is a terrifying event and a serious offence. As mentioned, Mr. Beckford-Salmon acknowledges this.

PRINCIPLES OF SENTENCING

[18] I have the very difficult task of determining the just disposition for such serious offences committed by an otherwise upstanding young person. To do this, I must consider what constitutes a proportionate sentence in these circumstances, having regard to the objectives and principles of sentencing outlined in section 718 of the Criminal Code and in the case law.

[19] Denunciation and general and specific deterrence are the paramount sentencing considerations in the circumstances of this case. This was a terrifying and serious attempted robbery, and a significant amount of Fentanyl was found in Mr. Beckford-Salmon's car. Members of our community should not be subjected to the terrorizing behaviour exhibited by Mr. Beckford-Salmon, and that behaviour must be denounced. It is also important to send a message to our community that such conduct will be treated seriously by the courts.

[20] In addition to the robbery, the destructive nature of Fentanyl, and the opioid crisis in general are well known. As our Supreme Court noted in R. v. Parranto, 2021 SCC 46 at paragraph 96, Fentanyl on our streets has a real and deadly impact on the lives of Canadians:

Indeed, trafficking in Fentanyl is so deadly that various courts have described it as a national crisis, reflective of an increased understanding of the gravity of the harm it causes.

[21] It has led to countless overdoses and severe addictions that, of course, lead to other crimes. Individuals like Mr. Beckford-Salmon, who possess these substances for the purpose of trafficking contribute to the pain and suffering of those addicts and the host of other societal ills that result from its destructive distribution.

[22] I adopt the words of the Provincial Court of Alberta in R. v. Frazer, 2017 ABPC 116 at paragraph 11:

Trafficking in fentanyl is almost the equivalent of putting multiple bullets in the chambers of a revolver and playing Russian roulette. It is the most efficient killer of drug users on the market today.

[23] I understand that Mr. Beckford-Salmon was not charged with actually trafficking the Fentanyl in this case, but that was his ultimate intention. Upon trafficking that drug, it had the potential to kill its ultimate user.

[24] The Crown provided a helpful chart of cases that have considered the appropriate range of sentence for Fentanyl offences. Notably, In R. v. Loor, 2017 ONCA 696, our Court of Appeal for Ontario, at paragraph 50, held that, generally speaking, even first offenders who traffic significant amounts of Fentanyl should expect to receive significant penitentiary sentences. The amount of Fentanyl in Loor was 45 patches. The Court upheld a 6 year sentence. Mr. Loor had a previous, related record and did not have the mitigating circumstance of a guilty plea.

[25] In R. v. Gagnon 2017 ONSC 7470, a decision of Justice Conlon of our Superior Court in our jurisdiction of Halton (albeit, sitting in Walkerton on that case) found that 12.34 grams of powder Fentanyl was a "significant amount" of Fentanyl and a 4 year sentence was appropriate. I do note that this sentence was for an individual with a significant criminal record and it was after a trial.

[26] In addition to these very aggravating factors, however, sentencing is always an individual process which requires flexibility in the application of all the principles of sentencing to the relevant factors related to the offence and the offender. Prospects of rehabilitation should always be considered, even in cases where denunciation and deterrence are the primary factors.

[27] Mr. Beckford-Salmon has no prior criminal record. He was 19 years old at the time of the offence. He is a person of colour who, through the EPSR, has shown his struggles with racism. I accept that, as mentioned by our Court of Appeal in R. v. Morris, 2021 ONCA 680 at paragraph 1 that:

It is beyond doubt that anti-Black racism, including both overt and systemic anti-Black racism, has been, and continues to be, a reality in Canadian society, and in particular in the Greater Toronto Area. That reality is reflected in many social institutions, most notably the criminal justice system. It is equally clear that anti-Black racism can have a profound and insidious impact on those who must endure it on a daily basis.

[28] In Morris, all of the charges arose out of Mr. Morris's possession of a loaded handgun. At paragraph 181 of the decision, the Court of Appeal for Ontario noted:

Mr. Morris was in custody on other charges when sentenced on these charges. Understandably, given the positions of the parties, no one suggested Mr. Morris should receive a conditional sentence. We would observe, however, that all other factors being equal, had Mr. Morris been before the courts exclusively on these charges and had a conditional sentence, like that ordered in Anderson (NSCA), been available, the trial judge would have had to give that option serious consideration.

[29] Mr. Beckford-Salmon has been on house arrest with a GPS ankle monitor since December 7, 2022. As of today, that is 981 days or 2 years, 8 months and 1 week. There were a couple variations, including one to allow him to travel on a family trip with his mom to Quebec, but even then, the ankle monitor remained, and he was not allowed to be alone. What this means is that this young man has not been allowed out of his house without the state monitoring his movements from age 19 to 22 – a significant time in a young person's life.

[30] Time on bail can and should be considered when fashioning the proper sentence, particularly when there is a condition of house arrest. Both the Crown and Defence agree that this time on bail should be considered a mitigating circumstance. In R. v. Downes, [2006] O.J. No. 555 at paragraph 37, our Court of Appeal noted:

a trial judge faced with an offender who has spent time on bail under house arrest should adopt a flexible approach. In the end, the amount of credit and the manner in which it is taken into account as a mitigating factor is a matter for the trial judge. That factor must be considered along with the myriad of other mitigating and aggravating circumstances that may impact on the sentence in a given case.

[31] The Court continues:

Credit for pre-trial bail conditions should be approached in the following manner:

• Time spent on stringent pre-sentence bail conditions, especially house arrest, is a relevant mitigating factor.

• As such, the trial judge must consider the time spent on bail under house arrest in determining the length of sentence.

• The failure of the trial judge to explain why time spent on bail under house arrest has not been taken into account is an error in principle.

• The amount of credit to be given for time spent on bail under house arrest is within the discretion of the trial judge and there is no formula that the judge is required to apply.

• The amount of credit will depend upon a number of factors including, the length of time spent on bail under house arrest; the stringency of the conditions; the impact on the offender's liberty; the ability of the offender to carry on normal relationships, employment and activity.

[32] As mentioned, Mr. Beckford-Salmon was on house arrest with an ankle monitor for 981 days or 2 years and 8 months. That time on house arrest is extraordinary – particularly for such a young man with no criminal record. I want to be clear – I am not saying his bail conditions were inappropriate. Given the offences he was charged with, GPS monitoring, house arrest and strict bail conditions were reasonable. While I decline to put a specific number on it, it is a significant mitigating factor in my view. From age 19 to 22, Mr. Beckford-Salmon has been unable to leave his home or be without his surety. That is a significant restraint on a young man's life. He has not been able to work, and no doubt has missed out on countless opportunities as a result. His mother, in her letter to court, outlines the depression and defeatism he has often felt. I have no hesitation accepting that. Despite this, contrary to what we unfortunately hear often amplified in the media, he has not breached his bail and has obeyed all the rules, demonstrating an ability to follow court orders. This is a young man who, in my view, is ready to turn his life around.

[33] This, along with the other mitigating factors in this case I outlined have led me to find that a sentence of 2 years less a day is appropriate for Mr. Beckford Salmon's exceptional circumstances. The next question is to decide if it should be served in the community. Some of the exceptional circumstances I find in this case are:

1. He was 19 at the time of the offences. Had he committed the offence 23 months earlier, he would have been charged as a youth.

2. Despite his circumstances growing up and what was going on around him as a child, he was never in trouble with the law prior to this offence.

3. While he rightfully explored the issuance of the search warrant in this case through a Charter challenge, he immediately pled guilty after receiving my judgment on that matter.

4. While a firearm was present during this botched robbery, and it was in fact discharged, there is no evidence that Mr. Beckford-Salmon ever possessed that gun or fired it. There is also nothing to indicate that he had any knowledge that his co-assailant possessed the firearm.

5. Despite his learning difficulties and having his life moved from Toronto to Burlington, he graduated high school and was able to secure legitimate employment prior to committing these offences.

6. He has been on bail, being monitored by an ankle monitor for 981 days, or 2 years and 8 months, and has demonstrated that he abides by court orders.

7. His crime, while very serious, was incredibly unsophisticated. He drove a car, registered in his name, to a robbery. The license plates were clearly visible to closed caption video cameras. The Fentanyl was then found in that same car registered to him. That is to say, the crime itself shows his naivety and youth.

8. The EPSR was very helpful in showing his background, growing up with a single mother as a black male. I find that Mr. Beckford-Salmon was influenced by his peers, despite his mother's best efforts, to prevent him getting into crime.

[34] I again turn to the decision in Morris, wherein the Court of Appeal states at paragraph 124-125:

The restraint principle plays a specific and important role in sentencing for serious crimes like crimes involving the unlawful possession of loaded handguns. Because of the seriousness of crimes involving the possession of loaded handguns, some term of imprisonment will usually be required to reflect the seriousness of the crime.

The requirement of a sentence of imprisonment does not, however, end the operation of the restraint principle. That principle requires the court, if it determines that a sentence of less than two years imprisonment would be appropriate, to consider whether the term of imprisonment could be served in the community under a conditional sentence. The restraint principle favours conditional sentences over-incarceration if a conditional sentence is consistent with the proportionality principle.

THE SENTENCE

[35] In the unique circumstances of this case, I am going to give Mr. Beckford-Salmon an unusual and exceptional chance. He should be going to the penitentiary. I have struggled with fashioning this sentence, because there is little doubt that these offences, even for first time offenders, demand a penitentiary sentence. But I cannot blindly stamp a number on this case, send Mr. Beckford-Salmon to jail and hope for the best, particularly after he has spent almost three years on bail demonstrating his commitment to obeying court orders and turning his life around. I am required to exercise restraint when possible and treat each case individually. Given everything I have outlined, including the EPSR and his time on bail awaiting this sentence, I find that a Conditional Sentence followed by a probation order will adequately send the appropriate message to him and the community, but will also help to give this young man with an otherwise clean record a chance to prove himself.

[36] I adopt the words of Justice Nakatsuru of our Superior Court in R. v. Stewart, 2024 ONSC 281 at paragraph 67, where His Honour states, while speaking to Mr. Stewart:

Another principle of sentencing supporting a conditional sentence is that of restraint, given that you are a youthful first offender. Still another is the one mentioned in Morris where we must do better, when the facts call for it, when it comes to the overincarceration of Black offenders. A conditional sentence, in the right case, is an ideal way to tackle this difficult problem.

[37] Were I to sentence Mr. Beckford-Salmon to a sentence above 2 years, probation would not be an option. Rather than go to jail and be released in a year or so on parole with no real supervision, he is going to be sentenced to a 2-year (less a day) sentence and be subject to conditions. He will then be on probation for 3 years. Essentially, he is going to have the possibility of jail hanging over his head for the next 5 years of his life. If he breaches any of these conditions, I would not hesitate to convert his CSO to an actual jail sentence.

[38] The conditions of the CSO are as follows:

Statutory Conditions

1. Keep the peace and be of good behaviour.

2. Appear before the court when required to do so by the court.

3. Report as the Court directs in person to a supervisor and thereafter report when required by the supervisor and in a manner directed by the supervisor.

4. Remain in Ontario unless you have prior written permission from the Court or the supervisor to leave the province.

5. Notify the court or supervisor in advance of any change of name or address and promptly notify the court or supervisor of any change in employment or occupation.

Other Conditions

1. Report by telephone to a supervisor within 3 working days and after that, at all times and places as directed by the supervisor or any person authorized by a supervisor to assist in your supervision.

2. Co-operate with your supervisor. You must sign any releases necessary to permit the supervisor to monitor your compliance and you must provide proof of compliance with any condition of this Order to your supervisor on request.

3. House Arrest: You will be subject to house arrest for the full duration of the CSO. Remain in your residence or on the property of your residence at all times, except:

   i) On Saturdays, between the hours of 12 pm to 4 pm in order to acquire the necessities of life.

   ii) For any medical emergencies involving you or any member of your immediate family.

   iii) For going directly to and from or being at school, employment, court attendances, religious services and legal or medical or dental appointments.

   iv) For going directly to or from and being at assessment, treatment or counselling sessions.

   v) For going directly to or from and performing community service hours.

   vi) You will confirm your schedule in advance with the supervisor setting out the times for these activities.

   vii) With the prior written approval of the supervisor. The written approval is to be carried with you during these times.

4. Do not change your place of residence without first obtaining the written permission of your supervisor.

5. You must present yourself at your doorway upon the request of your supervisor or a peace officer for the purpose of verifying your compliance with your home confinement condition.

6. You shall report immediately for the purpose of arranging your enrolment in the Electronic Supervision Program.

7. You shall participate and abide by the rules and regulations of that program as required by your Conditional Sentence Supervisor and/or designated Electronic Supervision Resource Officer for the purpose of monitoring your house arrest, home curfew, residence restriction, etc.

8. You shall be placed on Electronic Supervision for the period of 1 year. After 1 year, if there are no allegations of a breach, the electronic supervision will cease, but you will still be subject to house arrest with the above exceptions for the remainder of the CSO.

9. You shall permit the Ministry of the Solicitor General staff and/or persons who are authorized by the Ministry of the Solicitor General associated with the Electronic Supervision Program to enter your residence for the purpose of setting up, installing, maintaining, repairing or removing the Electronic Supervision Program equipment.

10. Do not possess any weapon(s) as defined by the Criminal Code (for example: a BB gun, pellet gun, firearm, imitation firearm, cross-bow, prohibited or restricted weapon or device, ammunition or explosive substance or anything designed to be used or intended for use to cause death or injury or to threaten or intimidate any person).

11. Attend and actively participate in all assessment, counselling or rehabilitative programs as directed by the supervisor and complete them to the satisfaction of the supervisor.

12. You shall sign any release of information forms as will enable your supervisor to monitor your attendance and completion of any assessments, counselling or rehabilitative programs as directed.

13. You shall provide proof of your attendance and completion of any assessments, counselling or rehabilitative programs as directed.

14. Perform 50 hours of community service work on a rate and schedule to be directed by the supervisor but must be completed within 23 months of the start date to this Order.

15. Make reasonable efforts to seek and maintain suitable work and provide proof of same as required by the supervisor.

[39] Following the CSO, he will be placed on probation for 3 years. The conditions of that probation are similar to the CSO, and are as follows:

1. Report by telephone to a probation officer within 3 working days of the completion of your CSO, and after that, at all times and places as directed by the probation officer or any person authorized by a probation officer to assist in your supervision.

2. Co-operate with your probation officer. You must sign any releases necessary to permit the probation officer to monitor your compliance and you must provide proof of compliance with any condition of this Order to your probation officer on request.

3. Do not possess any weapon(s) as defined by the Criminal Code (for example: a BB gun, pellet gun, firearm, imitation firearm, cross-bow, prohibited or restricted weapon or device, ammunition or explosive substance or anything designed to be used or intended for use to cause death or injury or to threaten or intimidate any person).

4. Attend and actively participate in all assessment, counselling or rehabilitative programs as directed by the probation officer and complete them to the satisfaction of the probation officer.

5. You shall sign any release of information forms as will enable your probation officer to monitor your attendance and completion of any assessments, counselling or rehabilitative programs as directed.

6. Make reasonable efforts to seek and maintain suitable work and provide proof of same as required by the probation officer.

[40] The section 109 of the Criminal Code order and the DNA orders will also issue.

[41] Assuming Mr. Beckford-Salmon completes this sentence without a breach he will effectively have been subject to supervision by the state (including his time on bail) from December 7, 2022 to August 14, 2030 – Almost 8 years of his life. A good portion of that will have involved GPS monitoring and house arrest. That, in my view, is a significant sentence for a first-time offender and appropriately addresses the paramount principles of denunciation and deterrence while also addressing the need for rehabilitation and restraint.

[42] The sentence can be allotted as 2 years less a day, concurrent on each count. While they could have been consecutive sentences, in all the circumstances of this case, to address the principles of sentencing I have mentioned, I find that a global sentence of 2 years less a day is appropriate.

Remarks to the Accused

[43] Mr. Beckford Salmon, it is really too bad you did this. Your mother went to great lengths to provide you a better life. She spoke in her letter to the court about how when you were a baby she vowed you would never end up being a criminal. Despite her best efforts, you let her down and ended up exactly where she tried so hard to avoid. While you struggled throughout your life, and I accept that, it must also be remembered that someone could have been shot when you broke into that house, and others could have died from consuming the Fentanyl you possessed to traffic. There is never an excuse to put others in such serious danger.

[44] I am taking a chance on you, and if you do not abide by the conditions I have mentioned, as I said, I will not hesitate to convert your sentence to an actual jail sentence. I suspect you came to this courthouse thinking you were going to a federal penitentiary today. I want you to remember that fear you probably had today and do everything you can to stay on the right path. You will not be given a chance like this again. I want you to work on yourself. Work to get a job. You and your mother have done so much to overcome adversity in the past, you know you are capable of doing it. Don't let yourself or your mom down again. Most importantly, be a positive example to those who may be tempted to go down the wrong path.

[45] I want to end with some words from your sister in the email she wrote to the Court. I want her insightful and incredibly articulate words to stick with you the rest of your life:

The younger version of him, the one who might have internalized society's low expectations, who may have felt lost, unheard and disconnected, has disappeared. That boy is gone. In his place stands a man who is grounded, thoughtful and fiercely determined. He is no longer reacting to life. He is creating a life of his own. He listens more, reflects more, and moves forward with intention.

[46] This next part is not a court order. But if possible, come back here in a few years and show me what you have done. Where you are in life. Prove to me I was right to take a chance on you.

Released: August 14, 2025

Justice B.G. Puddington