3 total
The court dismissed the accused's Charter applications and convicted him of driving over 80 and impaired driving.
The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle while impaired and driving with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding 80 mg per 100 ml of blood following a traffic stop.
The accused challenged the admissibility of breath sample test results, alleging breaches of Charter rights under sections 8 and 10(b), specifically regarding the timing of the roadside screening demand, the timing of breath samples, and the adequacy of rights to counsel advisement in a language he understood.
The court found that the roadside demand was made forthwith, the breath samples were taken as soon as practicable, and the police took reasonable steps to ensure the accused understood his rights to counsel in Mandarin.
The court admitted the evidence and found the accused guilty on both counts, with the impaired driving count stayed pursuant to the Kienapple principle.
Coach convicted on multiple child pornography counts arising from exploitative text exchanges.
Criminal trial concerning a basketball coach charged with multiple child pornography and sexual exploitation offences arising from text-message communications with underage players.
The court held that explicit photos and videos of a complainant's penis and masturbation were child pornography under s. 163.1, applying the objective approach in Sharpe, and rejected the accused's position that the exchanges were merely jokes or locker-room talk.
The court further found that the accused occupied a position of trust or authority over one complainant and that the private use exception was unavailable because the sexual activity was unlawful notwithstanding apparent consent.
Acquittals were entered on counts where age or statutory elements were not proved, but convictions were entered on multiple communicating, making, possession, access, invitation to sexual touching, and attempt counts.
Application for stay of proceedings due to unreasonable delay dismissed under transitional exceptional circumstances.
The applicant, charged with child pornography and luring offences, brought an application for a stay of proceedings alleging his right to a trial within a reasonable time under s. 11(b) of the Charter was infringed.
The total delay was approximately 43 months.
After deducting defence delay and discrete events, the net delay exceeded the 30-month presumptive ceiling established in Jordan.
However, applying the transitional exceptional circumstances framework, the court found the delay was justified under the previous Morin guidelines.
The application was dismissed.
