Robert Bigelow

The accused was charged with care and control of a motor vehicle while impaired by drugs on February 3, 2012.

The Crown relied on evidence from a standardized field sobriety test (SFST), a drug recognition evaluation (DRE), and urine analysis showing multiple substances.

The defence challenged the validity of the DRE demand and alleged Charter violations under sections 8, 9, and 10(a).

The court found the DRE demand was unlawful due to insufficient reasonable grounds, constituting a breach of section 8.

The court also found violations of section 10(a) as the accused was not informed of the reasons for detention.

Under section 24(2) of the Charter, the court excluded the evidence obtained from the DRE and urine sample.

On the merits, the court found the Crown had not proven impairment beyond a reasonable doubt based on admissible evidence and dismissed the charge.

The accused were charged with possession of cannabis marijuana for the purpose of trafficking and possession of proceeds of crime following execution of a search warrant.

Both accused brought a motion for a stay of proceedings based on an alleged violation of their section 11(b) Charter rights (right to trial within a reasonable time).

The total delay from commencement of proceedings to trial was 19 months and 22 days.

The court found that approximately 16 months of delay was attributable to state conduct, including Crown delays in vetting the Information to Obtain and significant institutional delays in scheduling.

The court found that the delay exceeded the 8-10 month guideline for provincial court trials and that the accused suffered some prejudice from the extended delay.

The court granted the stay of proceedings.

The accused was charged with possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking, possession of marijuana over 30 grams, and possession of proceeds of crime.

Police officers stopped and detained the accused in an alley near Queen Street West and Tecumseh Avenue in Toronto based on suspicions arising from observing two individuals in an alcove.

During a pat-down search, officers discovered 86.75 grams of marijuana.

The accused brought a Charter application to exclude the evidence, alleging violations of sections 8, 9, 10(a), and 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The court found that the detention was unlawful, the search was unlawful, and there was a breach of the right to counsel.

Applying the R v. Grant test, the court excluded the evidence and dismissed all charges.

The accused was charged with impaired driving and operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding 80 mg per 100 mL of blood following a roadside stop on June 22, 2011.

The Crown proceeded summarily.

The accused brought Charter applications challenging the admissibility of breath test evidence and alleging breaches of her rights.

The court found no breach of sections 7 or 11(d) regarding access to the Intoxilyzer 8000C, but found a breach of section 9 (arbitrary detention) due to over-holding for approximately 7 hours after breath tests were completed.

The court admitted the breath test evidence and found the accused guilty of the over 80 charge.

The impaired charge was conditionally stayed.

A nominal fine of $100 with enhanced credit for time served and a one-year driving prohibition were imposed as remedy for the section 9 breach.

A corporation engaged in construction work pleaded guilty to criminal negligence causing death following a swing stage collapse that killed four workers and seriously injured another.

The incident occurred when six workers and a site supervisor were on a swing stage with only two lifelines available, and three of the four deceased had marijuana in their systems.

The court imposed a fine of $200,000 plus a 15% victim fine surcharge of $30,000, considering the corporation's financial circumstances, prior good character, and the statutory factors for corporate sentencing under the Criminal Code.

The defendant, a director of a construction company, pleaded guilty to four counts of failing to take all reasonable care to ensure compliance with occupational health and safety regulations.

The charges arose from a catastrophic incident on December 24, 2009, when a suspended work platform collapsed during balcony repair work on two Toronto buildings, resulting in four deaths and one serious injury.

The defendant failed to ensure non-English-speaking workers received written safety instructions in their native languages, failed to maintain required training records, allowed defective equipment to be used without proper documentation, and failed to prevent overloading of the work platform.

The court imposed fines of $22,500 per count with a 25% victim fine surcharge, payable over 12 months.