Richard Sherman

The offender, an Indigenous woman, pleaded guilty to aggravated assault and assault causing bodily harm against two different victims, one of whom was an intimate partner and the other a vulnerable Indigenous woman who suffered a traumatic brain injury.

The court balanced the Gladue principles under s. 718.2(e) of the Criminal Code, which address the systemic factors affecting Indigenous offenders, with the requirement under s. 718.04 to prioritize denunciation and deterrence when sentencing for violence against vulnerable Indigenous women.

The court imposed a total sentence of 3 years and 2 months, reduced to 2 years after credit for pre-sentence custody, along with restitution orders.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for arson and mischief, was subject to an annual review hearing before the Ontario Review Board.

The hospital and the Crown recommended the continuation of the existing detention disposition, while the accused sought a conditional discharge.

Relying on the uncontroverted expert evidence of the treating psychiatrist, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his limited insight, recent re-emergence of psychotic symptoms, and the risk of unsafe behaviour during decompensation.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention disposition without changes.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory annual review of the accused's disposition under s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault and other offences, has diagnoses of schizophrenia and severe stimulant use disorder.

While the accused demonstrated stability in the community, the Board found that he continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to the risk of rapid clinical destabilization if he relapses into substance use.

The Board concluded that a conditional discharge was premature and ordered the continuation of the existing detention order to ensure adequate supervision and risk management.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a hearing to review the hospital's decision to readmit the accused, who was previously discharged to the community, following a substance use relapse and deteriorating mental state.

The Board found that the readmission constituted a significant restriction of liberty but was reasonable and warranted.

However, the Board noted that the accused's initial one-month placement in a non-forensic unit, due to a bed shortage, did not meet the least onerous and least restrictive test.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for offences including possessing a weapon and uttering threats.

The accused sought a conditional discharge, while the Hospital and Crown recommended continuing his detention order with privileges.

The Board accepted the psychiatric evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his bipolar disorder, history of medication non-compliance, and risk of relapse.

The Board ordered that the accused continue to be detained at the hospital with privileges up to residing in approved community accommodation, finding this to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary to protect the public.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for arson and related offences committed while experiencing auditory hallucinations.

At the initial disposition hearing, the Ontario Review Board found the accused to be a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a detention order at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, with privileges to live in the community in approved housing, subject to conditions including abstention from alcohol and drugs.

This sentencing decision addresses the serious offence of trafficking fentanyl, highlighting the gravity of the crime and the moral blameworthiness of the offender, Jason Gallant, who pleaded guilty to four counts of trafficking fentanyl in 2023.

The court emphasizes the national crisis posed by fentanyl abuse and the necessity for denunciation and deterrence in sentencing.

Despite mitigating factors such as the offender's addiction, prior rehabilitation efforts, and health issues, the court imposes a two-year penitentiary sentence, underscoring the repeated nature of the offences, trafficking for profit, and the offender's concerning attitude towards the harm caused by fentanyl trafficking.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault and other offences, has diagnoses of schizophrenia and severe stimulant use disorder.

Despite recent progress in a residential treatment program, the accused remains vulnerable to relapse and rapid mental health deterioration.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered the continuation of the current detention order at the hospital.

The Crown applied to have Thomas Snowden declared a dangerous offender or, alternatively, a long-term offender, following his guilty pleas to multiple child pornography and breach of recognizance charges.

The court denied both dangerous offender and long-term offender designations, finding that the predicate offences did not meet the definition of a serious personal injury offence (SPIO) as there was no direct causal connection between Snowden's actions (possession/distribution of child pornography) and the severe psychological damage suffered by the victims, which largely stemmed from the original abuse.

The court also found no substantial risk of violent re-offending, which is required for a long-term offender designation.

Snowden was sentenced to a determinate sentence of 5 years, with 3 years credit for pre-sentence custody, resulting in 2 years in penitentiary.