R. v. Oppong-Nsafoah, 2026 ONSC 3031

COURT FILE NO.: CR-24-10000534

DATE: 20260525

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

HIS MAJESTY THE KING

– and –

AKWASI OPPONG-NSAFOAH

COUNSEL:

Levi Karademir, for the Crown

Ari Goldkind, for Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah

HEARD: April 20, 2026

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

DAVIES, J.

A. Overview

[1] Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated assault. He admitted that he stabbed Keaton McDonald. The stabbing took place on Yonge Street just outside the Eaton Centre at 7:20 pm on June 28, 2022.

[2] Much of the altercation between Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah and Mr. McDonald was caught on video, so most of the facts are not in dispute. However, the very start of their interaction was not captured. But it is an agreed fact that the knife Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah used to stab Mr. McDonald belonged to Mr. McDonald. There is no video of what Mr. McDonald was doing with the knife before Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah took it from him. Nor is there any evidence of how Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah disarmed Mr. McDonald. The video does show that Mr. McDonald continued to pursue and verbally engage with Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah after he was disarmed. As Mr. McDonald was pursuing Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah, Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah charged at Mr. McDonald with the knife in his hand but did not make contact with Mr. McDonald. One of the men who was with Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah then kicked Mr. McDonald twice in the stomach and punched him repeatedly in the head.

[3] Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s threat and the other man’s assault did not deter Mr. McDonald. Mr. McDonald continued to pursue and yell at Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah then threw three full cans of beer at Mr. McDonald, one of which hit Mr. McDonald in the shoulder as Mr. McDonald was running away. Mr. McDonald retaliated by throwing several full glass bottles at Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah and Mr. McDonald continued to throw cans and bottles at each other.

[4] Eventually, Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah went inside the Eaton’s Centre and stood inside the glass doors. Mr. McDonald stayed outside and continued throwing bottles. A few seconds later, Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah chose to go back outside and re-engage with Mr. McDonald, who was still throwing bottles. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah chased Mr. McDonald onto the Yonge Street. Mr. McDonald threw one more bottle at Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah and Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah then stabbed Mr. McDonald several times.

[5] Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah walked away from Mr. McDonald after the stabbing, but Mr. McDonald followed him for several blocks. Eventually, Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah flagged down several police officers. Mr. McDonald was taken to hospital and Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah was arrested.

[6] It is now my job to determine the appropriate sentence for Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah. The Crown argued the appropriate sentence is five years in jail. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah argued the appropriate sentence is two years in jail.

[7] I find that a sentence of three and a half years is necessary to satisfy the principles of denunciation and deterrence but will also account for the mitigating factors in this case,

B. Legal Framework

[8] The sentencing range for aggravated assault is very broad. In truly extraordinary cases, courts have imposed non-custodial sentences. Sentences in the middle of the range tend to be between eighteen months and two years less a day. Cases that warrant a sentence in the middle of the range usually involve first-time offenders with other significant mitigating factors. The high end of the range involves sentences between four and eight years. High-end sentences are usually imposed in cases of extreme violence resulting in serious injuries where the defendants has a criminal record for violence and in cases involving an unprovoked or premediated assault: R. v. Tourcotte, 2011 ONSC 1677 at paras. 27-30, R. v. Seerattan, 2019 ONSC 4340 at paras. 35-36.

[9] The sentences imposed in other case are a helpful guide when deciding what sentence is appropriate. But sentencing is always an individualized exercise. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of his offence and his level of responsibility considering the unique combination of aggravating and mitigation circumstances in his case: R. v. Morris, 2021 ONCA 680 at para. 56, Criminal Code, ss. 718, 718.1 and 718.2, R. v. Lacasse, 2015 SCC 64 at para. 58.

C. A sentence in the middle of the established range would be disproportionately short

[10] I find that a sentence in the range proposed by the defence would not adequately denounce or deter Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s conduct. I reached that conclusion for five reasons.

[11] First, Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s offence involved a very significant level of violence and endangerd Mr. McDonald’s life. Mr. McDonald had five stab wounds to his back and one under his arm. He was in critical condition when he was taken to hospital. Mr. McDonald underwent surgery and remained in an induced coma for several days. Mr. McDonald did not provide a victim impact statement but given the nature and extent of his injuries, I am satisfied the assault has had a lasting impact on him.

[12] Second, the incident occurred in a public place and put members of the public at risk of serious harm. The video shows dozens of people on the sidewalk outside the Eaton’s Centre when Mr. Oppong-Nsafaoh and Mr. McDonald were hurling cans and bottles at each other, and when the stabbing took place. Those people could easily have been injured in the commotion.

[13] Third, the incident lasted several minutes. In other words, the stabbing was not the result of a momentary lack of judgment or a sudden loss of control by Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah.

[14] Fourth, it was Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah who escalated the situation from a verbal altercation into a physical altercation. I appreciate that Mr. McDonald continued to pursue and yell at Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah after Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah took the knife from Mr. McDonald. I also understand that Mr. McDonald was not deterred by Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah charging at him with the knife or by the assault by one of the people with Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah. But it was Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s decision to throw a can at Mr. McDonald that significantly escalated the situation. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah also chose to re-engage with Mr. McDonald after he had retreated into the Eaton’s Centre.

[15] Fifth, Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah is not a first-time offender. He has a lengthy criminal record dating back to 1997. Most of Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s convictions are for property related offences such as theft and fraud, or failing to comply with court orders. But he has a few dated convictions involving acts of violence. In 2002 he was convicted of robbery and forcible confinement. He served the equivalent of 20 months of pre-sentence custody and received a 1-day sentence. In 2004 he was convicted of assault and was sentenced to 30 days in custody. He was convicted of assault again in 2005 and received a 90-day intermittent sentence. In 2006, he was convicted of assaulting a peace officer and received a 7-day sentence. It is significant that Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah has no entries on his criminal record for crimes of violence in the last 20 years. There is also a five-year gap in his record between 2018 and 2023 in which he was not found guilty of any offence.

[16] Given the seriousness of the offence and the other aggravating factors, I find that a sentence of two years would be disproportionately short.

D. A sentence at the high end of the range would be disproportionately long

[17] It that same time, I find a sentence in the range proposed by the Crown would be disproportionately long given several important mitigating factors.

[18] First, Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah pleaded guilty. By doing so, he has taken full responsibility for his conduct. When asked if he had anything to say during his sentencing hearing, Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah did not try to excuse or minimize his conduct. He acknowledged that over-reacted to Mr. McDonald and did not exercise sound judgment that day.

[19] Second, Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah expressed genuine remorse for the harm he caused Mr. McDonald. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah wholeheartedly apologized to Mr. McDonald during the sentencing hearing. I am satisfied that Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah understands that the outcome of this case could have been much worse. During the sentencing hearing, he said he is grateful Mr. McDonald survived the attack. I accept that Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah has insight into his conduct and is genuinely remorseful for what he did.

[20] Third, by pleading guilty, Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah saved the court significant resources that had been set aside for his trial.

[21] Fourth, there were elements of both self-defence and provocation involved in this matter. At the start of the altercation, Mr. McDonald was the one with the knife, and Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah disarmed him. Mr. McDonald continued to pursue Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah even after he was disarmed. He approached Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah several times and was yelling at him. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah charged at Mr. McDonald with the knife in his hand, in an apparent effort to scare Mr. McDonald off. One of the people with Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah kicked Mr. McDonald in the stomach and punched him several times. Neither of those actions stopped Mr. McDonald. He continued to follow and yell at Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah may have been justified in using some force to stop Mr. McDonald. But I am satisfied that Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s response to Mr. McDonald’s persistent approaches was neither reasonable nor proportionate in the circumstances. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah escalated the situation by hurling full cans of beer at Mr. McDonald. And by the time Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah stabbed Mr. McDonald, Mr. McDonald did not pose a threat to Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah had retreated into the Eaton’s Centre and was safe. He choose to go back outside and re-engage with Mr. McDonald. In those circumstances, stabbing Mr. McDonald was not reasonable and does not meet the test for legal self-defence. Nevertheless, some elements of the defence were present and the stabbing cannot be characterized as unprovoked or premeditated.

[22] Fifth, Mr. Oppong-Nsafoa has a strong, stable support network in the community and seems motivated to live a pro-social life. Given the seriousness of Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s offences, denunciation and deterrence are the paramount considerations. Nevertheless, rehabilitation is a relevant, albeit less significant factor. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah acknowledged that his criminal record does not paint him in a positive light. I agree However, he said that over the last 4 years that he has been on bail, he has been committed to his family and providing for his three children. The fact that Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah has a supportive partner and is a committed father will help him reintegrate after his sentence is over.

[23] The fact that Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah pleaded guilty and that some elements of self-defence and provocation were present distinguishes this case from the two cases the Crown relied on most heavily. I am satisfied that those two factors, together with the other mitigating factors, justify a sentence below 5 years.

[24] The Crown urged me to find that the circumstances of this case are similar to R. v. Imam, 2022 ONSC 4866, in which the defendant was convicted of aggravated assault and given a 5-year sentence. Mr. Imam had an altercation with the victim outside a shopping mall. He then followed the victim into the mall and stabbed him repeatedly in the head, neck and torso. There are obvious similarities in terms of the seriousness of the offence in Imam and Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s offence. Both involved multiple stab wounds resulting in serious injuries. There is one important mitigating factor in Imam that was not present here – Mr. Imam had no criminal record. However, several factors in this case justify a shorter sentence than was imposed in Imam. First, Mr. Imam was found guilty after a trial; he did not plead guilty and take responsibility for his conduct like Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah. Second, unlike Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah, Mr. Imam brought the knife with him to the mall that he then used to stab his victim. Third, in Imam, there was no evidence about what provoked the attack. Here, Mr. McDonald was the one who was initially in possession of the knife and he continued to pursue Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah after he was disarmed, after Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah charged at him in a threatening way, after Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s friend kicked and punched him and after Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah threw beer cans at him.

[25] The Crown also urged me to find that Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s case is like R. v. Roberts, 2009 ONCJ 246, in which the defendant pleaded guilty to stabbing a stranger on a bus and was given a 7-year sentence. Mr. Roberts’ victim was sleeping at the time of the attack. The Court described the attack in Roberts as a random act of violence on a vulnerable victim. Again, there are some similarities between the facts of Roberts and this case. Both involve a stabbing that caused serious injury to the victim. In both cases, the defendant pleaded guilty and had a criminal record. However, without minimizing the seriousness of Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s conduct, I find that Mr. Roberts’s unprovoked attack on a vulnerable stranger is much more serious than Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s assault on Mr. McDonald, which was not unprovoked and had elements of self-defence. Mr. Roberts was also on probation at the time of the stabbing and was subject to a weapons prohibition, which is a significant aggravating factor that is not present in Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah’s case.

E. Conclusion

[26] Having considered all the aggravating and mitigation factors, I find that a sentence of three and a half years is a just and proportionate sentence in this case.

[27] Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah spent three days in custody before he was released on bail. He is entitled to 5 days credit for the time he has already spent in custody. The balance of his sentence is, therefore, 1272 days.

F. Ancillary Orders

[28] Aggravated assault is listed in paragraph (a) of the definition of “primary designated offence.” I am, therefore, required to make an order that Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah provide a sample of his bodily substance for the purpose of forensic DNA analysis in accordance with s. 487.051 of the Criminal Code.

[29] Aggravated assault is an indictable offence that involves the use of violence and it carries a maximum sentence of 14 years. I must, therefore, make an order prohibiting Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah from possessing any firearm, crossbow, restricted weapon, ammunition, and explosive substance under s. 109(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. Because a weapons prohibition order was made under s. 109 of the Criminal Code when Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah was convicted of drug offences in 2005, the order I make now must be a life-time prohibition.

[30] Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah asked that I make an order that he is not required to pay the victim fine surcharge. The Crown did not take a position on this issue. Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah lost his job in 2022 because of these charges. He found some work while on bail but was recently laid off. I am satisfied that Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah is required to pay the victim fine surcharge unless doing so would cause him undue hardship: Criminal Code, s. 737(2.1)(a). Mr. Oppong-Nsafoah is, therefore, not required to pay the victim fine surcharge.

Davies, J.

Released orally: May 22, 2026

Released in writing: May 25, 2026

CITATION: R. v. Oppong-Nsafoah, 2026 ONSC 3031

COURT FILE NO.: CR-24-10000534

DATE: 20260525

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE