Robert Stanley Kraska

The accused, S.J., pleaded guilty to four counts (6, 7, 8, 9) and proceeded to trial on four others (1, 2, 3, 4) involving the complainant, M.B., with whom he was in an intimate partner relationship.

The trial focused on allegations of sexual assault (Count 1), assault causing bodily harm (Count 2), mischief (Count 3) related to a September 2015 incident, and a later assault (Count 4) from May 2021.

Applying the R. v. W.(D.) framework, the court found M.B.'s evidence regarding the 2015 incident credible and reliable, while rejecting S.J.'s testimony as inconsistent and unbelievable.

Consequently, S.J. was found guilty of sexual assault and assault causing bodily harm for the 2015 incident.

For the 2021 allegations, M.B.'s evidence was deemed credible but unreliable due to internal inconsistencies and implausibility, leading to S.J.'s acquittal on the mischief and May 2021 assault charges.

The defendant, Garnett Akeele Grant, was found guilty after trial of five drug offences, including possession of fentanyl, crack cocaine, powdered cocaine, and methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking, and simple possession of oxycodone.

The Crown sought a global sentence of 3.5 to 4 years' imprisonment.

The court considered the gravity of the offences, particularly the dangers of fentanyl, alongside significant mitigating factors, including the defendant's youth (18 at the time of offence), first-time offender status, challenging upbringing, and substantial rehabilitative efforts since his arrest.

Finding exceptional circumstances, the court imposed a conditional sentence of two years less a day, followed by three years of probation, a $300 fine for simple possession, a 10-year weapons prohibition, and forfeiture of seized drugs and money.

The defendants, brothers Garret and Garnett Grant, were arrested following a traffic stop that escalated into a search for cannabis and then a firearm.

They faced charges related to unauthorized firearm possession and possession of controlled substances for the purpose of trafficking.

Both defendants brought Charter applications alleging arbitrary detention, unreasonable searches, and breaches of their right to counsel, including racial profiling.

The court dismissed the Charter applications for arbitrary detention and unreasonable search, finding the police conduct lawful and not racially motivated.

However, it found a breach of the right to be informed of the reason for detention (s. 10(a)) due to delayed notification of drug charges.

Applying the Grant analysis, the court admitted the evidence.

On the merits, Garret Grant was found guilty of all firearm charges, while Garnett Grant was found guilty of most drug trafficking charges and simple possession of oxycodone.

Garret Grant was acquitted of all drug charges, and Garnett Grant was acquitted of one drug trafficking count.

At a preliminary inquiry, the Crown sought committal on two counts: possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking contrary to s. 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, and simple possession of oxycodone contrary to s. 4(1).

The accused was arrested following six weeks of police surveillance and a search warrant executed at a residence.

Police seized cocaine and oxycodone from the residence and dime bags of cocaine from the accused's person.

The court discharged the accused on both counts, finding that while the Crown's theory was plausible, the evidence was fatally deficient in detail necessary to support the essential elements of knowledge and control of the drugs found in the residence.

The court emphasized that the Crown's case relied on circumstantial evidence that lacked sufficient foundational facts, including inadequate evidence of the accused's exclusive or primary connection to the residence and the specific rooms where drugs were secreted.