R. v. Haque, 2026 ONSC 1197

CITATION: R. v. Haque, 2026 ONSC 1197

COURT FILE NO.: CR-24-10000564-0000

DATE: 20260302

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

HIS MAJESTY THE KING

• and -

Naiemul Haque

Karolina Visic, for the Crown

Ariel Herscovitch, for Mr. Haque

HEARD: February 3, 2025 and January 12, 2026

M. forestell j.

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

Background and Overview

1Naiemul Haque entered guilty pleas on February 3, 2025, to the following charges: Count 6, possession of a loaded firearm; Count 10, breach of a prohibition order, Count 11, possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking; and Count 12, possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking. The matter was adjourned several times for sentencing. Sentencing submissions were eventually made on January 12, 2026.

2The Crown submits that a global sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment is appropriate, after consideration of the principle of totality and before credit for presentence custody. The Crown position is that the only presentence custody that should be credited is the time spent in custody after Mr. Haque’s revised statutory release date for his previous sentence which was September 10, 2023.

3Mr. Haque’s position is that a global sentence of 4.5 to 5 years is appropriate before credit for presentence custody. Mr. Haque submits that it is open to me to credit Mr. Haque for all of his time in custody following his arrest on the charges on February 8, 2023.

4For the reasons set out below, I have concluded that a global sentence of 8 years will be imposed before credit for presentence custody. The credit will include only the time spent in presentence custody after the statutory release date of September 10, 2023.

Circumstances of the Offences

5Mr. Haque was on parole in January and February of 2023. He came to the attention of the police in the course of an unrelated investigation. The police then conducted surveillance on Mr. Haque. He was observed to travel outside the city limits in breach of his parole conditions. The police stopped him in his vehicle on February 8, 2023, for the purpose of arresting him for the breach of parole. A search incident to arrest revealed a loaded Glock 26, 9 mm handgun in a satchel around Mr. Haque’s waist. The magazine contained 9 rounds and there was a round in the chamber. The serial numbers on the slide and lower receiver of the firearm were tampered with and were illegible. A search warrant executed on the car revealed eight baggies of drugs. Five baggies contained cocaine weighing 56.81 grams. One of the baggies contained 6.12 grams of ketamine. One contained 13.5 grams of methamphetamine, and one contained 1.38 grams of a combination of para-Fluorofentanyl and fentanyl.

Circumstances of Mr. Haque

6Mr. Haque is 27 years old. He was 24 years old at the time of these offences. He was born in Toronto and lived with his parents and sister in the Bloor and Ossington area his whole life. He is of Bangladeshi and Filipino descent. He comes from a loving and supportive family. His sister is a nurse and his parents are retired. He has a good relationship with his parents and his sister. No other member of the family has had any involvement with the criminal justice system.

7Mr. Haque grew up in an underserved neighbourhood marked by violence and drug crime.

8He completed high school. Since his incarceration on these charges, Mr. Haque has applied to pursue a post-secondary education.

9Mr. Haque held various jobs throughout his adolescence, including maintenance; retail; moving; fast-food; and car detailing. While on parole, he worked in construction; at a wood factory; and at a moving company, before leaving the moving company to start his own moving company.

10Mr. Haque has plans to get a trucking licence and work in the oil industry after serving his sentence. He has been invited to be interviewed for the Skilled Trades Development Program run by Oaks Revitalization Association upon his release. A case worker from the Oaks Revitalization Association provided a letter of support indicating that Mr. Haque is a strong candidate for the programme based on his demonstrated ability to participate in programming while in custody.

11Mr. Haque has one previous criminal conviction in June of 2019 for discharging a firearm with intent to endanger life. He was sentenced to five years and six months for that offence. The sentence was reduced by one year as credit for presentence custody, resulting in 4.5 years to be served in the penitentiary.

12The circumstances of the previous offence are set out in the reasons for sentence of Justice Pringle. In summary, two groups came into conflict. A person in one of the two groups called Mr. Haque for assistance. Mr. Haque arrived, armed with a loaded firearm. He spoke to the person who had called him and then approached the other group, drew his gun and pointed it at the group. Two members of the opposing group also drew guns and discharged them at Mr. Haque. Mr. Haque fired his gun towards the men. Mr. Haque was the only person struck in the exchange of gunfire. The incident occurred in the early morning hours, at a busy intersection in Toronto. The probation officer who prepared the presentence report, wrote that Mr. Haque described the incident as a “drug sale that went wrong”. At his day parole hearing, Mr. Haque acknowledged that he was part of a group of friends that engaged in drug trafficking which resulted in a conflict over ‘turf’.

13While serving his sentence for the discharge of the firearm, Mr. Haque participated in programming and was described as an excellent participant. While on day parole, he continued to participate in programing.

14Mr. Haque was released on day parole in January of 2021 and full parole on August 12, 2021. While on day parole, he resided in a Community Residential Facility in Oshawa. On full parole, he was permitted to reside in his parents’ home. After his arrest for parole violations and these charges, his parole was revoked. His statutory release date was then revised to September 10, 2023.

15After September 10, 2023, Mr. Haque remained in custody on these charges. The number of days in presentence custody to today is 904 days. During the time in custody since his parole revocation, Mr. Haque was detained in Toronto area detention centres. He was subject to frequent lockdowns due to staff shortages. During lockdowns, although shower programs are sometimes offered, the time available is insufficient for all inmates to access showers. Inmates are cut off from family because of restricted access to telephones. They are unable to exercise or to breathe fresh air. At the Toronto East Detention Centre (“TEDC”), there was minimal access to the yard and Mr. Haque was often housed with two other inmates in a cell designed for a maximum of two inmates.

16In spite of these conditions, Mr. Haque completed programs and attempted to access continuing education.

17Mr. Haque reported to the probation officer and stated in an affidavit on sentencing that he had a substance abuse problem in the community. He stated in the affidavit that he bought oxycodone, Percocet and small amounts of fentanyl. His substance abuse was related to his diagnosis of Post-traumatic Stress Disorder. Mr. Haque used substances to manage his stress.

Legal Principles and Analysis

18The fundamental principle in sentencing is that a sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender.

19The offences in this case are very serious. Gun crimes and drug-related crimes are prevalent and of significant concern in this community. Based on the quantity and variety of drugs possessed by Mr. Haque, I infer that he was engaged in drug trafficking at the low end of the mid-level of the trafficking hierarchy. Mr. Haque armed himself with a firearm for protection in this dangerous enterprise.

20Denunciation and deterrence are the paramount objectives in sentencing for trafficking in controlled substances, and for firearms offences.

21Although this will not be Mr. Haque’s first penitentiary sentence, he is a youthful offender, and the principle of restraint requires that I impose the shortest period of imprisonment that is consistent with the relevant principles and objectives of sentence.

22I must consider any aggravating and mitigating factors in arriving at a fit sentence. Aggravating factors in relation to the firearms offences are that the firearm was in a vehicle in a densely populated area, it was stored in a careless manner, the serial numbers were tampered with and there was a bullet in the chamber. In relation to the drug offences, aggravating factors are that the drugs were located in a vehicle and, there was a variety of drugs including fentanyl.

23Aggravating factors relating to Mr. Haque are that he was on parole at the time of the offences, and he has a criminal record for a related offence.

24Mitigating factors are that Mr. Haque is a youthful offender, he has a supportive family, he has a steady employment history and good prospects for training and employment on release. He has taken advantage of programming while in custody, and he has shown remorse with his guilty plea.

25I have taken into account that Mr. Haque has a substance abuse problem, but I recognize that he is not an ‘addict-trafficker’ in the sense of selling drugs only to support his own drug use. Mr. Haque was selling for financial gain.

26An important mitigating factor is that Mr. Haque has spent a lengthy period of time in extremely harsh conditions at the Toronto South Detention Centre and the TEDC. He was subject to the type of harsh conditions that have been repeatedly described and denounced by these courts. Although I am only crediting Mr. Haque for his presentence custody from September 10, 2023, I have considered all of his time in Toronto detention centres as a mitigating factor on sentence.

27Possession of a loaded firearm will generally attract a penitentiary sentence of three to five years, even for a youthful first offender.¹ The range of sentence for recidivist firearms possessors is five to nine years.² Breaches of prohibition orders generally attract consecutive sentences of one year.

28Sentences for cocaine trafficking-related offences range from two to five years for mid-level traffickers.³ Sentences for trafficking-related offences involving methamphetamine are in the same range as cocaine trafficking because of the recognized devastating impact of methamphetamine and its increasing prevalence.⁴

29In this case, a sentence of six years for possession of the loaded firearm is appropriate. Mr. Haque’s recent prior firearms conviction and the other aggravating factors take the sentence beyond the lower end of the range. I would impose a sentence of one year for the breach of the prohibition order. For the drug offences, a sentence of two years for the cocaine and one year for the methamphetamine would be appropriate. I have considered the aggravating factors, including the variety of drugs seized which included fentanyl and the fact that Mr. Haque was a mid-level trafficker. I have also taken into account his youth, his prospects for rehabilitation, the harsh conditions of presentence custody and the need for restraint.

30The principles of sentencing would generally call for consecutive sentences to be imposed for these offences. The imposition of consecutive sentences would result in a total sentence of 10 years. The principle of totality requires that I assess the cumulative sentence and consider whether the total sentence would be unduly harsh and crushing given the age, circumstances and prospects of Mr. Haque.

31In applying the principle of totality, I have considered the aggravating and mitigating factors. I have also considered Mr. Haque’s previous 4.5-year penitentiary sentence and the ‘jump’ principle that sentences for repeat offenders should increase incrementally rather than by large leaps. Mr. Haque’s involvement in criminality while on parole and the similarity of the offences clearly requires that he receive a significantly longer sentence, but I have concluded that a 10-year sentence — about double his previous sentence — would be crushing. As a result, I will impose a global sentence of eight years.

Conclusion

32I therefore impose a global sentence of eight years before credit for presentence custody which is broken down as follows:

• On Count 6, possession of a loaded firearm: 6 years

• On Count 10, breach of a prohibition order: 1 year consecutive

• On Count 11, possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking: 2 years concurrent

• On Count 12, possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking: 1 year consecutive

33Mr. Haque has now been in custody for 904 days. Credited at 1.5 to 1, he is entitled to credit of 1,356 days. Eight years equals 2,922 days. Therefore, after credit, the sentence left Mr. Haque to serve is 1,566 days or four years, three months and 13 days.

34In addition, I make the following ancillary orders: 1. a DNA order pursuant to s.487.051 of the Criminal Code; 2. a s.109 weapons prohibition for life; and 3. a forfeiture order for all items seized.

M. Forestell J.

Footnotes

1. 1R. v. Marshall, (2015) 2015 ONCA 692, 340 O.A.C. 201; R. v. Mansingh, 2017 ONCA 68
2. 2R. v. Graham, 2018 ONSC 6817, at paras. 39-40
3. 3Graham, supra, at para. 47
4. 4R. v. Ho, [2011] O.J. No. 6672