Richard Addelman

The accused pleaded guilty to four charges involving passport fraud, including causing the Passport Office to use forged documents in issuing passports, possession of forged passports, possession of a false wig with intent to commit an indictable offence, and use of a forged passport.

The offences occurred between 2009 and 2011 and were part of a sophisticated scheme to obtain false Canadian passports and identity documents to unlawfully bring his children from Kuwait to Canada, circumventing a custody order that prohibited their removal.

The court imposed a sentence of 18 months imprisonment followed by 12 months probation, rejecting a conditional sentence despite mitigating factors including the accused's guilty plea, positive pre-sentence report, lack of criminal record, medical condition, and family support.

The accused was charged with assault causing bodily harm, possession of marijuana, and breach of probation following an incident on January 16, 2012.

The accused conceded causing bodily harm but claimed self-defence under section 34(1) of the Criminal Code.

The court found that while the initial use of force was justified, the accused continued the assault long after the threat was neutralized, acting out of anger rather than self-defence.

The court convicted the accused of assault causing bodily harm and breach of probation, and acquitted on the marijuana charge.

The accused was charged with possession of crack cocaine and marijuana for the purpose of trafficking, and possession of proceeds of crime.

Police executed a search warrant at his apartment after observing short visits indicative of drug trafficking, finding drugs and cash.

The accused testified that the marijuana was for his personal use and that the crack cocaine belonged to his roommate, an exotic dancer who was a cocaine addict.

Applying the W. (D.) framework, the court found the accused's testimony plausible and noted shortcomings in the police investigation, including the failure to call the roommate as a witness.

The court acquitted the accused of the trafficking and proceeds of crime charges, but found him guilty of the lesser included offence of simple possession of marijuana based on his own admission.

The accused, a 20-year-old first-time offender, pleaded guilty to one count of Attempt to Obstruct Justice contrary to section 139(2) of the Criminal Code.

The accused was observed cleaning the interior of a vehicle that had been used in a homicide, removing evidence including blood and other forensic material.

The Crown sought a 12-month jail sentence plus probation, while the defence sought a suspended sentence or conditional sentence.

The court imposed an 18-month conditional sentence to be served in the community with strict conditions, followed by 2 years probation, along with a 5-year weapons prohibition and a DNA order.

Following trial convictions for sexual assault-related offences against a child, the court imposed sentence with primary emphasis on denunciation, deterrence, and separation from society under sections 718 and 718.01 of the Criminal Code.

The court found numerous aggravating factors, including repeated abuse over years, abuse of parental trust, use of a weapon, and attempts to silence the victim with money, while identifying few mitigating factors.

The court also treated lack of insight and poor response to prior programming as relevant to rehabilitation prospects, without treating denial of guilt as an aggravating factor.

A global penitentiary sentence of six years was imposed, with 2:1 credit for pre-sentence custody for charges predating February 22, 2010.

Ancillary lifetime orders were made for weapons prohibition, DNA collection, sex offender registration, and child-contact restrictions, along with no-contact orders during custody and post-release.

The appellant appealed a conviction for refusing to provide breath samples under s. 254(5) of the Criminal Code.

The appeal argued that the trial judge failed to adequately address significant inconsistencies in the evidence of police witnesses concerning signs of impairment and the suitability of a breath sample accepted by the breathalyser machine.

The court held that the trial judge’s reasons did not explain how credibility conflicts among the officers were resolved, particularly regarding the arresting officer’s observations and the breath technician’s rejection of an accepted sample.

Applying the functional approach to adequacy of reasons articulated in Supreme Court jurisprudence, the court concluded that the reasons did not permit meaningful appellate review.

A new trial was ordered.

The offender was convicted of multiple offences including trafficking in cocaine and conspiracy to traffic as part of a mid-level drug operation known as Project Bulldawg.

Despite strong family support and evidence that the offender was an addict-trafficker, the court emphasized denunciation and deterrence given the kilogram-level quantities and prior trafficking record.

The court imposed a global sentence of 5 years imprisonment, reduced to 4 years after crediting 12 months for strict pre-trial bail conditions, along with a DNA order and a lifetime weapons prohibition.