ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE
Date and File Numbers
DATE: 2025-01-28
COURT FILE No.: 22-10002433-02, 22-10002434-00
Toronto Region
Parties
BETWEEN:
His Majesty the King
— AND —
Dominic D’Angelo Wright
Counsel
Jeanette Gevikoglu — counsel for the Crown
Melinda Macchia and Rubaina Singh — counsel for the accused
Before
Justice H. Pringle
Heard on January 21, 2025
Reasons for Judgment released on January 28, 2025
PRINGLE J.:
OVERVIEW
[1] After trial, Mr. Wright was found guilty of four drug-trafficking related counts and multiple firearm-related offences. On April 7, 2022, he was in physical possession of a loaded handgun and over $3000 cash. He was found in constructive possession of illicit items inside a condo unit, including over $20,000 cash, fentanyl mixed with a benzodiazepine, and heroin mixed with fentanyl.
[2] A joint submission of six years custody, globally for all offences, was put before the court. It is within an appropriate range of sentence and I will impose it.
[3] Sentencing was adjourned to permit further consideration of an Impact of Race and Culture Assessment Report (hereinafter “IRCA”) received during sentencing submissions. This IRCA report delved into factors that brought Mr. Wright into conflict with the criminal justice system. It deserved careful attention, and sentencing was adjourned to permit that.
CIRCUMSTANCES OF MR. WRIGHT
[4] Mr. Wright is 27 years old. He has been in presentence custody, on this matter and another, since 2022. He was 24 years old when he committed the offences before this court.
[5] He is a Black male of Jamaican descent raised in a single-parent home. Mr. Wright’s mother was a teenager when she gave birth to him and his brother. His parents separated when he was two.
[6] His father established a new family life, with a new partner and children. They raised those children in a stable neighbourhood, away from negative influences. As a result, Mr. Wright’s half-siblings ended up with opportunities that he and his brother did not: they went to college and got employment offers with their father’s trucking company.
[7] In contrast, Mr. Wright’s mother was the sole financial provider for her two sons for many years. They had to live where she could afford. From age three to sixteen, they lived at a notoriously dangerous apartment building at Jane and Finch. The report described his childhood memories of that home:
…a low-income neighbourhood, notorious for crime, poverty, and drug-related activities. He explained that in this neighbourhood where he grew up, trouble was literally outside their door. For instance, the local park was burned down by individuals; there were frequent shootings in the hallways, and the elevator was often unusable due to urine and excessive garbage. Mr. Wright added that the staircases were littered with needles and drug paraphernalia like needles and pieces of tin foil, and he witnessed ongoing drug transactions and people who had overdosed.
He remembered his mother warning him to watch out for needles while walking. He also recalled regularly seeing ambulances in the area responding to drug-related emergencies. From his perspective, gun violence was also prevalent. He highlighted that, because of the dangers, his mother did not allow him and his brother to play or socialize outside.
… there was a heavy police presence in the area, with 10 to 15 officers patrolling the building approximately twice a week. The officers would start at the 21st floor, the top level of the building, and work their way down. Mr. Wright recalled seeing the officers put the elevator into service and clear each hallway and staircase. Groups of five officers would monitor the staircases while others used the elevator to methodically check the floors to ensure there was no one loitering. He stated that he frequently encountered the police while using the stairs to leave his home and was often subjected to searches. He added that he was regularly carded, strip-searched, and questioned about where he lived, why he was in that residence, and where he was going. Mr. Wright noted that these interactions became a normal experience for him and his friends during that time.
[8] His mother could not afford much beyond necessaries for survival. Growing up, Mr. Wright missed out on opportunities because of that. He could not join a basketball program he really wanted to participate in with his friends. He missed school trips, school dances, and other social events for the same reason.
[9] One such missed opportunity happened in grade 7. Mr. Wright could not afford to go on a school camping trip. His close friend drowned on that trip. Mr. Wright, a strong swimmer, still shoulders guilt for not being there to save his friend.
[10] Mr. Wright began to act out after his friend drowned. He experimented with marijuana and started skipping school. This rebellious behaviour led him to be transferred to a different school. The IRCA report’s author observed that:
…bereaved young adults frequently experience intense and prolonged grief, as well as declines in physical health, greater reliance on healthcare for emotional and physical issues, and increased substance use as a coping mechanism.
[11] Mr. Wright was still in middle school when his friend passed away. There were other challenges hitting him at the same time. After being academically successful in his French immersion elementary school, he found the change to English lessons disconcerting. His behavioural problems got worse.
[12] He was transferred to a different school. This school, Mr. Wright described, was “one of the worst schools in the Finch area….many individuals who attended [school] either ended up deceased or incarcerated.” Unsurprisingly, his behaviour did not improve.
[13] Despite being quite intelligent, Mr. Wright did not finish high school as a teenager. By this point, he was regularly colliding with the criminal justice system in ways he said he did nothing to prompt. He recalled being strip searched at school by his principal, in the presence of police officers. He was expelled from high school, despite having good grades, due to a minor breach of a behavioural contract.
[14] He started at an alternative high school. They expelled him when he incurred criminal charges. Mr. Wright described this as “the beginning of a downward spiral in his life”. He began using Percocets and cough syrup to get through the day. He was constantly being arrested, mostly for offences that he was later acquitted of.
[15] He also continued to suffer loss. He lost several friends to gun violence. Some of these deaths happened because his friend was in the wrong neighbourhood at the wrong time. About seven years ago, Mr. Wright himself was grazed by a bullet. This left him in constant fear for his own life.
[16] At some point, Mr. Wright leaned into the stereotype he had resisted so strongly as a youth. He became involved in the drug trade and possessed a loaded handgun. The IRCA report shed little specific insight into how and why that happened. It is possible he armed himself because he struggles with PTSD. It is possible he armed himself because he narrowly escaped being shot at. It is distinctly possible that the firearm he carried was to protect his drug trafficking business. All these scenarios could, and probably were, simultaneously true.
[17] The report did suggest that his impoverished upbringing led to a desire to possess quality clothes, jewelry, shoes. Indirectly, I took this to explain why he was trafficking fentanyl and oxy. This means Mr. Wright was trafficking drugs out of pure greed, sympathetic background or not.
[18] But Mr. Wright was also spending about $150 per day on Percocets and cough syrup. Indeed, in the unit he was staying, police located about 20 empty bottles of illegally obtained hydrocodone (an opioid) cough syrup. He admitted needing to use the cough syrup to function throughout the day.
[19] In other words, Mr. Wright’s motives for trafficking drugs were multi-faceted and included greed and feeding a significant drug habit. He has since quit using addictive controlled substances and is committed to remaining free of them once released from custody.
[20] In March 2023, Mr. Wright received his high school diploma. His progress towards this goal was nothing short of impressive:
Mr. Wright shared that he recently completed high school in March 2023 while incarcerated. Remarkably, he set a record by enrolling in February 2023 and finishing all the requirements for high school in just one month. He reflected that completing high school had always been a significant milestone for his mother, and achieving it was a way to make her proud while demonstrating his commitment to rehabilitation. Mr. Wright noted that opportunities for rehabilitation at the detention centre were limited, with few programs available to showcase personal growth. Pursuing his education was one of his few constructive options, and he embraced it fully.
Additionally, he mentioned that the prison offers 17 programs, and he has completed 16 of them. Mr. Wright shared that he remains committed to self-improvement in every way possible, focusing on his mental health, physical well-being, and education. He stated that he is currently enrolled in a business administration course through Centennial College, offered via distance learning in collaboration with the prison. He views this course as essential for his entrepreneurial ambitions, as it would enhance his credibility with potential investors and business partners. Mr. Wright highlighted that he has completed two mandatory courses and is about to start his third, with plans to graduate and attend the ceremony with his parents.
[21] Some of the grades he earned, from inside custody: 87% in Grade 12 level Literacy; 88% in Grade 11 Entrepreneurship; 80% in Grade 11 Mathematics. Currently, Mr. Wright is enrolled in Centennial College’s Business Management program. He is studying marketing and has five courses to complete towards a certificate in Marketing.
[22] Amadeusz, an educational group working at the Toronto South Detention Centre, helped him work at these educational goals. They said:
Throughout his involvement with Amadeusz, Dominic has demonstrated that he is a dedicated, capable, and engaged participant. He attends programs regularly, completes assignments, takes initiative in his learning, and asks for help when needed. Additionally, Dominic maintains a positive attitude toward his work with Amadeusz staff.
[23] Mr. Wright has targeted plans and goals for when he is released. He wants to further his education and his knowledge of business management in particular. For someone who seemed to navigate much of his teenaged years alone, he now has a network of community supports. His brother is clearly a strong source of support. A friend has offered him a job in his auto body shop. His father, with whom Mr. Wright has re-built a relationship, has also offered employment upon release.
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENCES AND SENTENCING OBJECTIVES
[24] These crimes were all committed in the early morning hours of April 7, 2022. Mr. Wright was returning to a condo unit at 6 am when police took him down. That take-down was on video. The police were professional and Mr. Wright was co-operative. During a pat-down search, the arresting officers located a loaded FN 5-7 handgun inside Mr. Wright’s vest. His pouch contained over $3000 cash, 47 oxycodone pills, and 5.41 grams of MDMA.
[25] The condo unit was then searched, pursuant to warrant, and the following illicit items were found inside: loose bullets, a loaded overcapacity magazine, $20,700 cash, and 2.93 grams of fentanyl inside a reusable shopping bag; two airsoft pistols in the living room area; at least 20 empty hydrocodone cough syrup bottles in the kitchen; 4.32 grams of powder fentanyl in a kitchen cupboard above the fridge, along with two measuring cups with white powder residue, a spoon with white powder residue, and a scale.
[26] Both counsel agree six years should be imposed, globally, for these crimes. Six years is a significant penitentiary sentence. Appellate courts have said significant penitentiary sentences are necessary, in cases like these, to accomplish the sentencing objectives of general deterrence and denunciation.
[27] Indeed, general deterrence and denunciation must be at the forefront of sentences for gun and drug trafficking crimes. The impact such crimes wreak on our community demands no less. Mr. Wright was engaged in the sale of poison by the point, during a time where opiates are ripping our community apart in multiple ways.
[28] Opiate trafficking begets many victims. Direct victims of the opioid crisis, the addicted, are often unseen or ignored. But before addiction took control, these victims had parents, siblings, jobs, a home, people who loved them and who they loved back. Addiction is understood as when substance use prevails, despite negative consequences arising from that same use – the loss of those relationships, that job, their self-worth, the people who loved them, their home, any roof over their head at all.
[29] Truly, this is a wretched and sustained form of victimization. Mr. Wright’s criminal activities contributed to that human misery. Drug trafficking has a strong and direct connection to property crime committed in our community. Mr. Wright’s offending played a part in that. The sale of opioids also presses down on our over-burdened health care system, which is still recovering from the strain of COVID-19. His offending played a part in that.
[30] In R. v. Parranto, 2021 SCC 46, the Supreme Court observed at para. 91 that
…the trafficking of hard drugs leads to "significant if not staggering" costs to society in terms of health care and law enforcement expenses, as well as lost productivity (Pushpanathan, at para. 89; see also R. v. Lloyd, 2016 SCC 13, [2016] 1 S.C.R. 130, at para. 82). In 2017, for example, it is estimated that abuse of opioids and cocaine in Canada resulted in total costs of $9.6 billion (Canadian Substance Use Costs and Harms Scientific Working Group, Canadian Substance Use Costs and Harms (2015-2017) (2020), at p. 1).
[31] That $9.6 billion figure is built on the foundation of individual opiate sales, point by point. The scarce government resources allocated to addiction treatment and to our drug treatment courts cannot keep up with the volume of increasing community need. Mr. Wright’s offending contributed to this societal struggle and is most serious.
[32] The seriousness of Mr. Wright’s gun possession must also be acknowledged. Mr. Wright is a victim of gun violence himself. His friends have died because of gun violence. Back in 2005, prosecutors described the shocking prevalence of shootings as “The Summer of the Gun”. Now, innocent people get shot on our streets often enough that it seems commonplace. Mr. Wright’s gun crimes directly contributed to this incessant community victimization.
[33] But it is error to focus on the seriousness of Mr. Wright’s crimes to the exclusion of his future rehabilitation. He is intelligent, hard-working, and ambitious. He has real potential to live a meaningful, significant life. Even in a serious case like this, Mr. Wright’s sentence cannot crush his hope for rehabilitation. He must be able to see, and plan for, that light at the end of the tunnel.
AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
[34] Six years is well within an appropriate range of sentence. It remained so after aggravating and mitigating circumstances were weighed. The aggravating factors were:
- The nature and the quantum of controlled substances he possessed. These were highly addictive Schedule I controlled substances. On his person, coming home at 6 am, he was carrying MDMA and 47 oxycodone pills. Inside the bedroom was fentanyl adulterated with a benzodiazepine[^1]. Heroin mixed with fentanyl was stored in the kitchen;
- The amount of cash Mr. Wright had on his person and inside the unit. The money totaled over $23,000. Mr. Wright may have been a street level dealer, but his operation involved multiple controlled substances and a relatively significant volume;
- The number of loose bullets found in the closet, the fact that the overcapacity magazine was loaded, and the two air pistols inside the living room, all possessed, at least in part, to protect his drug operation;
- The impact his offending had on our community. The Crown aptly described Mr. Wright’s offending as contributing to cycles of dispossession and violence that he, in his younger years, struggled with and against. Needles in parks, neighbourhoods rendered unsafe, families broken apart, small businesses robbed. Mr. Wright’s offending contributed to this ongoing victimization;
- The risk that Mr. Wright took in deciding to carry a loaded firearm on his person when out in public, before he arrived back at the target unit. It matters little that he did not use that firearm in public. Loading a firearm speaks to the intention to fire it, if he thought it “necessary”. Mr. Wright’s decision to arm himself in public put the lives of innocent community members, people that had nothing to do with the drug trade, at risk.
[35] The mitigating factors were:
- His relative youth and lack of criminal record. When he committed these offences, Mr. Wright was about 24 years old and he had no criminal record at that time[^2].
- Mr. Wright’s sincere expression of remorse for his offending, coupled with the strong insight that he has shown into his own behaviour. He expressed remorse to the IRCA report’s author. Additionally, he took the time to draft an insightful letter which expressed his remorse and regret. Given that counsel presented a joint submission on sentence, his letter was clearly not an attempt to persuade the court to be lenient but the output of his sincere reflection;
- The work he put into his own rehabilitation while in presentence custody. When he was not being locked down due to staff shortages, Mr. Wright was doing whatever he could, whenever he could, to rehabilitate himself. The educational goals he achieved, in particular, were meaningful and remarkable;
- The conditions of his presentence incarceration. He was locked down for approximately one-fifth of this time, and triple bunked approximately one-quarter of this time. I have expressed this mitigating factor in the form of enhanced presentence custody credit: see para. 39.
SENTENCE IMPOSED
[36] Six years in the penitentiary must be imposed upon Mr. Wright, less the time already served against that quantum. As of the date of sentencing submissions, Mr. Wright served the equivalent of 569 days, employing Summers credit. He served this time at the Toronto East Detention Centre (TEDC) and the Toronto South Detention Centre (TSDC).
[37] As of the date of sentencing submissions, Mr. Wright had been triple bunked for about one-quarter of the time in presentence custody. He was locked down, without access to rights like visits or phone calls or fresh air, for about one-fifth of his time in presentence custody.
[38] These were the circumstances of his incarceration during a time when he was presumed to be innocent. From a basic human rights perspective, the circumstances of his incarceration were inadequate. I felt compelled to exercise my discretion and express this mitigating factor in the form of enhanced presentence credit.
[39] As of the date of sentencing submissions, I found Mr. Wright had served the equivalent of 733 days against his global sentence of six years. He has since served, with Summers credit, the equivalent of another 10 days. Six years (2190 days) less 733 days less 10 days leaves 1,447 days for Mr. Wright still to serve. A DNA order will issue, as will a s. 109 weapons prohibition order.
[40] In conclusion, there is a joint submission before the court that is within the appropriate range and I have imposed it. Mr. Wright’s crimes called for a significant penalty. It also had to keep alive his hopes for, and his prospects of, rehabilitation.
[41] As Mr. Wright serves that sentence, it is my own hope that correctional authorities see how strong his rehabilitative potential is. It is my hope that his educational potential be given all the support the system can possibly give. It is my hope that Mr. Wright becomes a success story. Certainly, he is more than capable of it.
Released: January 28, 2025
Signed: Justice H. Pringle
[^1]: The mixture of fentanyl with a benzodiazepine was not, in this case, argued as an aggravating factor.
[^2]: Convictions post-dated the offending behaviour here and was not available as an aggravating factor. They will no doubt be kept in mind by parole authorities while assessing future risk.