R. Maranger

The Crown brought an application under s. 486(1) of the Criminal Code to exclude the public and media from the courtroom during the testimony of the accused and three other witnesses due to national security concerns.

The accused, a former civilian member of the RCMP, was charged under the Security of Information Act.

Applying the Sherman Estate test for discretionary limits on court openness, the court found a serious risk that classified information could be inadvertently disclosed during cross-examination.

The court granted the order, directing that the public be excluded during the specified testimony, but required that vetted transcripts be released as soon as possible to balance the open court principle with national security interests.

The offender was sentenced for failing to provide the necessaries of life and assault with a weapon against her 11-year-old son.

While her husband committed horrific acts of torture and abuse against the child, the offender was convicted for her failure to protect the child and intervene over a six-month period.

The court emphasized denunciation and deterrence, sentencing her to 3 years' imprisonment, less 19 months of pre-trial custody credit, resulting in 17 months left to serve.

Sentencing following guilty pleas to multiple drug trafficking offences and participation in a criminal organization.

The offender had no prior criminal record and no substance abuse history but admitted engaging in trafficking heroin, cocaine, and marijuana solely for profit.

The parties jointly proposed an eight‑year penitentiary sentence.

The principal dispute concerned credit for 1,335 days spent on stringent bail conditions prior to sentencing.

The court held that stringent bail conditions can be considered a mitigating factor but the appropriate credit is discretionary; in the circumstances the offender received two years credit, resulting in six years of imprisonment.

Two accused were tried on multiple counts arising from a lengthy police investigation into a large-scale drug trafficking operation involving cocaine, methamphetamine, marijuana, cannabis resin, and MDMA.

The prosecution relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, including surveillance, search warrants, seized narcotics and cash from a suspected stash house, and evidence of the accused attending the location and interacting with suspected suppliers.

The court held that conviction for possession for the purpose of trafficking and conspiracy required proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had knowledge and control of the drugs found in a locked room of the stash house.

Although surveillance and other evidence raised suspicion, the court concluded that reasonable doubt remained regarding whether either accused had knowledge and control of the narcotics, particularly in light of testimony explaining the presence of keys and frequent attendance at the residence.

One accused was acquitted on all counts, while the other was acquitted of the major trafficking counts but convicted of a separate marijuana trafficking charge.

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.