CITATION: R. v. Blake, 2026 ONSC 582

COURT FILE NO.: CR-24-50000048

DATE: 20260210

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

HIS MAJESTY THE KING

– and –

JOHNNOY BLAKE

Ella Brosh for the Crown

Mr. Blake, self-represented

HEARD: December 12, 2025

R. MAXWELL J.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT ON SENTENCE

1Mr. Blake has pled guilty to one count of pointing a firearm, contrary to s. 87(2) of the Code and possession of a firearm while prohibited from doing so contrary to s. 117.01(3)(a) of the Criminal Code.

2Mr. Blake appears before me on January 5, 2026 for judgment on sentence. In brief oral reasons, I imposed a conditional sentence of 23 months and 15 days to be followed by three years of probation. These are my reasons.

The Admitted Facts

[3]

The Admitted Facts

The complainant and the accused resided at a rooming house located at 62 Jasper Ave. in the city of Toronto. They have been involved in disputes in the past. On Wednesday May 24, 2023 at approximately 4:30pm, the complainant called 911 to report that the accused had put a handgun to his head and threatened to shoot. Emergency personnel arrived at 62 Jasper Ave. and located the accused and the complainant at the rooming house.

4The accused and the complainant had earlier been involved in a verbal dispute in the hallway of the top floor of the rooming house. During the argument, the accused was extremely agitated and brandished a black handgun, placing the muzzle of the handgun against the complainant’s forehead. He stated to the complainant, “You know I could shoot you.” He then again placed the muzzle of the handgun to the complainant's forehead. The complainant heard the handgun make a clicking noise. The accused turned around and walked back to his room with the handgun.

5The police subsequently obtained a search warrant to enter the accused’s room and located the firearm. On further analysis, the firearm was found to be an imitation firearm, namely a black Beretta BB handgun.

6At the time of the incident, the accused was bound by a prohibition order to not possess any weapons as defined by the Criminal Code.

Position of the Parties

[7]

Position of the Parties

On behalf of the Crown, Ms. Brosh recommends a conditional sentence of 23 months and 15 days (accounting for pre-sentence custody credit), to be followed by a period of three years of probation. The Crown also seeks a lifetime weapons prohibition and a DNA order.

8Mr. Blake, representing himself, does not contest the Crown’s position for a conditional sentence, nor does he take issue with the length of the conditional sentence or the ancillary orders. His submissions to the Court focused on the work he has done to improve himself over time and his prospects for rehabilitation.

Circumstances of the Offender

[9]

Circumstances of the Offender

Numerous documents were filed on the sentencing hearing which provide background on several aspects of Mr. Blake’s life. The documents included:

• A pre-sentence report;

• An email confirmation of Mr. Blake’s involvement with the Tier 2 Entrepreneurship Program (16 weeks) in 2024;

• A letter of reference from Carly Murray dated April 4, 2023;

• Medical records;

• A Notice of Decision from the Immigration and Refugee Board dated July 28, 2022 confirming Mr. Blake is a Convention refugee;

• A certificate of completion of the Abode Creative Cloud Training Program dated May 20, 2022;

• A Letter from the Canadian Training Institute dated April 17, 2024 confirming Mr. Blake’s participation in the counselling and support services program;

• A business licence for Mr. Blake’s clothing business;

• A consent bail variation dated December of 2023 varying the term of house arrest to allow for Mr. Blake to work in his business;

• A letter from psychologist Dr. Elizabeth Holmes-Bose dated May 10, 2023 which contains a detailed education and employment history and psychological assessment confirming that Mr. Blake meets the diagnostic criteria for Post-traumatic Stress Disorder and Bipolar 1 Disorder.

10Mr. Blake was born in Jamaica and is now 30 years old. He was raised by his mother who supported her family as a cashier. His biological father never lived with him. They had some contact particularly over the holidays. Mr. Blake has two half-brothers.

11He arrived in Canada on a work permit in May of 2016 at the age of 21. He worked as a ride attendant at an amusement company in British Columbia for eight months. He subsequently came to Toronto at the end of 2016. His work permit expired in January of 2017, however he remained in Canada.

12When he arrived in Toronto, he rented an apartment with his savings. After his savings ran out, Mr. Blake stayed at different shelters in Toronto. He obtained employment occasionally as a warehouse worker.

13On January 27, 2020, Mr. Blake filed A refugee claim, citing that he would be persecuted should he return to Jamaica because of his sexual orientation. In July 2022, Mr. Blake's application for refugee protection was approved by the Canada Border Service agency but his status was subsequently suspended due to criminal charges.

14Mr. Blake has four children. One child resides in Jamaica with her mother. He has three children in Canada, including one with his current partner. He has a good relationship with his ex-partner.

15Since February of 2021, Mr. Blake has run an online clothing business, which is doing well. He also generates additional income by renting out leased vehicles. He receives social assistance due to his refugee status. He has also completed a security course and worked in a security job between the end of 2021 and April of 2022.

16A letter from Eva's Initiatives dated January 20, 2022 was filed on the sentencing hearing. An employment advisor with the “Youth Succeeding in Employment” program, confirmed that Mr. Blake was accepted into an internship with the organization. He completed employment skills training and received certifications which provide him with the means to pursue other opportunities in the future. He also obtained employment through the organization.

17Mr. Blake also filed a letter from the Canadian Training Institute dated April 17, 2024 confirming that he is a participant in their Counselling and Support Services program.

18The author of the pre-sentence report noted that Mr. Blake’s strength lies in his commitment to remaining gainfully employed.

Principles of Sentencing

[19]

Principles of Sentencing

Turning to the fundamental principles of sentencing set out in ss. 718, 718.1 and 718.2 of the Code, the overriding purpose of sentencing is to encourage respect for the law and the maintenance of a “just, peaceful and safe society”. Section 718.1 provides that the sentence I impose must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender. The sentence I impose must reflect the circumstances of the offence and the attributes of the individual responsible for the crime.

20Section 718.2 directs that a court must take into consideration the principle that a sentence should be increased or reduced for any relevant aggravating or mitigating factors related to the offence or the offender.

21All available sanctions other than imprisonment that are reasonable in the circumstances should be considered for all offenders.

22Sentencing ranges and a review of similar cases are useful in ensuring that the parity principle is met and that similar penalties are imposed for similar offences of a similar nature involving similar offenders. Sentencing ranges are, however, only guidelines. The sentencing of an individual is, necessarily, an individualized process, as the Supreme Court reiterated in R. v. Lacasse, 2015 SCC 64, [2015] 3 S.C.R. 1089.

23It goes without saying that a firearm offence is an extremely serious offence. Protection of the public must be a predominant sentencing objective. The sentence I impose must denounce the dangerous conduct and deter Mr. Blake from this conduct in the future. Denunciation and deterrence, even in the face of significant mitigating factors, must be of paramount consideration when it comes to firearm offences because of the plague of gun violence in the city and the profound consequences firearms have on community safety: R. v. Nur, 2015 SCC 15, [2015] 1 S.C.R. 773; R. v. Danvers (2005), 2005 30044 (ON CA), 199 C.C.C. (3d) 490 (Ont. C.A.); R. v. Brown, 2010 ONCA 745, 277 O.A.C. 233; R. v. Delchev, 2014 ONCA 448, 323 O.A.C. 19; R. v. Dufour, 2015 ONCA 426, 326 C.C.C. (3d) 52.

24With these overarching principles of sentencing in mind, I turn to the aggravating and mitigating factors.

25In terms of aggravating factors, I accept the Crown’s position that the incident has had a profound impact on the complainant in this matter. His victim impact statement was filed on the sentencing hearing and speaks to his ongoing fear. Pursuant to s. 718.2(3.1), this is a statutorily aggravating factor.

26Mr. Blake’s criminal record is also aggravating.

27He had a finding of guilt in December of 2019 for carrying a concealed weapon, assaulting a peace officer, and common assault. He received a conditional discharge, 18 months of probation, and a s.110 weapons prohibition order for 10 years.

28In May of 2022, he plead guilty to one count of uttering a death threat and one count of pointing a firearm. The conviction arose from a road rage incident in which Mr. Blake removed an air soft pistol from his glove box and pointed it at another driver to threaten and intimidate him. The handgun in that case fired pellets and met the definition of a firearm under the Criminal Code. Mr. Blake was sentenced to a five-month conditional sentence, to be followed by probation for two years. The sentencing judge also imposed a s. 110 weapons probation order for 10 years.

29In September of 2024 Mr. Blake was convicted of escaping lawful custody and in February of 2025, one count of assault. The two convictions arise out of a sequence of events when Mr. Blake attended a police station regarding a possible charge of failing to comply with a recognizance order. While in the custody of the Toronto Police Service at a police station, Mr. Blake lunged at officers. The following day, he attempted to flee from officers as he was being transported to an interview room. He pled guilty to both counts and was sentenced to a probationary period, in light of the equivalent of 30 days of pre-sentence custody on the charge of escape lawful custody. He was sentenced to “time served” on the charge of assault.

30It is particularly aggravating that Mr. Blake committed this offence only five months after he was convicted for a very similar offence.

31In mitigation, Mr. Blake has pled guilty. I accept his plea, and his comments to the court, as a genuine expression of remorse. His guilty plea has spared the victim the experience of testifying to the events which were very traumatic for him.

32Mr. Blake also has strong prospects for rehabilitation. He has a strong support system with his partner and children. He has shown a commitment to leading a pro-social life through gainful employment. He is a good father to his children. In my view, while his criminal record is unenviable, he has reasonably strong rehabilitative prospects. Interfering with on-going successful rehabilitation should not be done more than is absolutely necessary: R. v. Rockey, 2016 ONCA 891, at paras. 38-39.

33I am also mindful of the direction from the Court of Appeal for Ontario in R. v. Morris, 2021 ONCA 680 that social context evidence relating to an offender’s life experiences may be considered to mitigate an offender’s degree of moral blameworthiness. The Court in Morris said, at para. 13, that courts should take judicial notice of the existence and impact of anti-black racism in Canadian society and consider any evidence of the specific effect of anti-black racism on the offender.

34Mr. Blake is a black man who, I accept, has experienced discrimination in his life.

35I also consider the collateral consequence of Mr. Blake’s immigration status.

36The Supreme Court of Canada explained that “collateral consequence” are “any consequence arising from the commission of an offence, the conviction for an offence, or the sentence imposed for an offence, that impacts the offender”: R. v. Suter, 2018 SCC 34, [2018] 2 S.C.R. 496, at para. 47.

37Mr. Blake is a refugee claimant. Although neither the Crown nor Mr. Blake presented documentation to confirm Mr. Blake’s status in Canada, it would appear that his refugee status is currently suspended. A period of incarceration in excess of two years would render him unable to appeal a finding of inadmissibility by the Immigration and Refugee Board.

The Sentence in this Case

[38]

The Sentence in this Case

Having balanced all of the mitigating factors, the collateral immigration consequences, the aggravating factors, the circumstances of Mr. Blake, and the circumstances of the offence, I conclude that the appropriate sentence in this case is in the range of 2 years.

39The Ontario Court of Appeal noted in Morris, at para. 180 that when the appropriate sentence in a case includes a sentence below the two-year mark, a sentencing judge must give careful consideration to the imposition of a conditional sentence. The court went on to state that a conditional sentence, properly used, can ameliorate the longstanding problem of over-incarceration of young Black men.

40Further, the Supreme Court of Canada held in R. v. Proulx, 2000 SCC 5, [2001] S.C.R. 61, at para. 79 and restated in R. v. Ali, 2022 ONCA 736, at para. 30, a conditional sentence, in addition to being more effective than incarceration in achieving goals of rehabilitation, is also a punitive sanction capable of achieving denunciation and deterrence.

41Section 742.1(a) of the Code sets out two prerequisites for such a sentence. The first is that service of the sentence must not endanger the safety of the community. Although Mr. Blake’s past criminal behavior and the circumstance of this offence create some concern for public safety, I am satisfied that, with appropriate conditions, the concerns for public safety are attenuated. Mr. Blake has a family and supports in the community. He has a business and a desire to continue to grow it. With counselling, as directed by a supervisor, for anger management and mental health, I am satisfied that he does not present a concern for public safety.

42The second prerequisite in s. 742.1(a) is that a conditional sentence must be “consistent with the fundamental purpose and principles of sentencing set out in sections 718 to 718.2.”

43I have already touched on the fundamental principles of sentencing which apply to this case. Denunciation and deterrence, as well as protection of the public are of paramount concern. In Mr. Blake’s circumstances, the principle of rehabilitation is also an important sentencing factor.

44On the issue of rehabilitation, as many courts have noted, the objective of rehabilitation, where there are good prospects for rehabilitation, can go further toward achieving the fundamental purposes of general and specific deterrence: see Nur, at para. 113-114; Proulx, at para. 107.

45At the end of the day, Mr. Blake must be sentenced as an individual, with regard for his circumstances.

46I have considered the matter carefully and I am satisfied that the additional custody I impose can be served in the community as a conditional sentence. I am satisfied, in the particular circumstances of this case, that it would be in the interests of justice, and would not endanger public safety, to allow Mr. Blake to serve his sentence in the community.

47I therefore will accede to the position and direct that the pre-sentence custody of the equivalent of 11 days be recorded on the Indictment on each count and that Mr. Blake be sentenced to a conditional sentence of 23 months and 15 days on each count, to run concurrently.

48The terms of the conditional sentence will be as follows:

• Keep the peace and be of good behaviour;

• Appear before the Court when required to do so;

• Report to a supervisor within 2 business days of this order and thereafter as directed;

• Remain in the province of Ontario unless written permission to go outside the province is obtained from the court or the conditional sentence supervisor;

• Reside at an address approved by the conditional sentence supervisor;

• Notify the conditional sentence supervisor in advance of any change in address 48 hours in advance of any change;

• Take counseling as directed by and to the satisfaction of the conditional sentence supervisor, in particular for mental health, life skills, and anger management;

• Sign releases for the conditional sentence supervisor to monitor your participation and progress in any counseling programs;

• For the first 12 months of your conditional sentence, remain in your place of residence at all times and not be outside the residence except to attend work or seek employment, attend counseling, attend scheduled medical appointments involving you or an immediate member of your family, for medical emergencies involving you or an immediate member of your family, to shop for necessities for one three-hour period per week, or as permitted in writing by the conditional sentence supervisor;

• For the next 6 months, observe a curfew and be in your place of residence at all times between the hours of 10pm and 6am, unless for a medical emergency involving you or a member of your family;

• Do not possess any weapons as defined by the Code;

• Have no contact directly or indirectly with Martin Frana;

• Not be within 500 m of anywhere Martin Frana lives, works, or is known to be.

49The conditional sentence order will be followed by a three-year probation order.

50The terms of the probation order will be:

• Keep the peace and be of good behaviour;

• Appear before the Court when required to do so;

• Report to a probation officer within 2 business days of this order and thereafter as directed;

• Remain in the province of Ontario unless written permission to go outside the province is obtained from the court or the probation officer;

• Reside at an address approved by the probation officer;

• Notify the probation officer in advance of any change in address 48 hours in advance of any change;

• Take counseling as directed by and to the satisfaction of the probation officer, in particular for mental health, life skills, anger management;

• Sign releases for the probation officer to monitor your participation and progress in any counseling programs;

• Do not possess any weapons as defined by the Code;

• Have no contact with directly or indirectly Martin Frana;

• Not be within 500 m of anywhere Martin Frana lives, works, or is known to be.

51I make an order under s. 109 of the Code prohibiting Mr. Blake from possessing any firearms, cross-bows, restricted weapons, ammunition, or explosive devices for life, this being his second s. 109 order.

52There will also be an order under s. 487.051 of the Code authorizing the taking of a sample of a bodily substance that is reasonably necessary for the purpose of forensic DNA analysis. The offences are secondary designated offences, but I am satisfied the minimal intrusion into Mr. Blake’s privacy is warranted in the circumstances of this case.

53I thank Crown counsel for their very fair approach to this matter. Mr. Blake, I wish you good luck.

R. Maxwell J.

Released: February 10, 2026

CITATION: R. v. Blake, 2026 ONSC 582