Peter M. Campbell

The appellant appealed his sentence of 12 years imprisonment (less 5 years for time served) imposed on December 21, 2016 for multiple drug trafficking and firearm offences.

The sentencing judge had determined an appropriate aggregate sentence of 17 years before applying mitigating factors and the totality principle.

The Court of Appeal found the sentence unfit, holding that the sentencing judge failed to adequately consider the appellant's guilty pleas, his relative youth and status as a first offender at the time of the initial offences, and the principle that an offender should not be crushed by the sentence.

The court allowed the appeal and reduced the sentence to 9 years imprisonment (less 5 years for pre-sentence custody).

The appellant was convicted of possession of crack cocaine and marijuana for the purpose of trafficking under s. 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

He brought two applications for a stay of proceedings based on infringement of his right to a timely trial under s. 11(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The first application was dismissed on September 25, 2015, and the second was brought following the Supreme Court's decision in R. v. Jordan.

The Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of both applications and dismissed the appeal against conviction.

The accused, Lowell Somerville, applied for a stay of proceedings under ss. 7 and 24(1) of the Charter, alleging abuse of process.

The application stemmed from police misconduct during the execution of a search warrant at his storage unit, where an officer stole a valuable Tony Montana statue and subsequently fabricated evidence.

The court found that four police officers lied under oath to conceal the theft and their knowledge of it.

The court concluded that this egregious state conduct, including theft and perjury, profoundly undermined the integrity of the justice system, warranting a stay of proceedings despite the serious drug charges faced by the accused.

The accused was charged with possession of cocaine and cannabis for the purposes of trafficking, and possession of proceeds of crime.

A Charter application was brought challenging the lawfulness of the vehicle search and cell phone seizure.

The court found that the initial traffic stop was justified based on unattached licence plates.

However, the subsequent search of the concealed tire-well compartment in the vehicle trunk was found to be an unreasonable search in breach of section 8 of the Charter.

The court concluded that the officers lacked reasonable grounds to arrest prior to discovering the drugs and that the search was not a bona fide inventory search but rather a pretext for a drug investigation.

The evidence was excluded under section 24(2) of the Charter.