Scott G. Pratt

The defendant, Ruben Aguiar, was charged with assaulting his son, J., who had a broken collarbone.

The defendant argued his actions were justified under s. 43 of the Criminal Code, which permits the use of reasonable force for correction.

The court found that while the defendant's actions were partly motivated by a desire to protect the child, the force used (grabbing the child by the face/head, lifting him, and dropping him) was not reasonable, especially given the child's pre-existing injury.

Furthermore, the court concluded that the child was not capable of understanding the correction at the time.

Consequently, s. 43 did not apply, and the defendant was found guilty of assault.

The offender, Kathy Jackson, pleaded guilty to conspiring to obstruct justice.

The conspiracy involved attempts to hide evidence (a gun) and prevent a victim from testifying in a robbery case involving her son.

The court considered the gravity of the offence, emphasizing that interference with the justice system is a serious attack on the rule of law, and that denunciation and deterrence are paramount.

Despite mitigating factors such as a guilty plea, no prior record, and community support, the court rejected a conditional discharge or suspended sentence.

The court found that such lenient sentences would be contrary to the public interest and insufficient to achieve sentencing principles, particularly given the ongoing nature of the conspiracy.

The defendant was charged with impaired operation of a conveyance and operation with a blood alcohol concentration equal to or greater than the legal limit.

The defence argued that the defendant's Charter rights were violated and sought exclusion of evidence.

The court found the defendant was impaired but not "operating" the vehicle as defined by the Criminal Code, specifically lacking "care or control" because the presumption of operation was rebutted by the defendant's credible testimony of a multi-pronged plan not to drive.

The Crown failed to prove actual care or control beyond a reasonable doubt, as there was no realistic risk that the defendant would have driven.

Consequently, the charges were dismissed.

This ruling addresses an application under s. 11(b) of the Charter for a stay of proceedings due to unreasonable delay.

The defendant faced multiple charges, including firearms and driving offences, across five different informations sworn between 2018 and 2020.

The court found that even after deducting defence-attributable delay and exceptional circumstances (COVID-19 pandemic), the net delay for all informations exceeded the presumptive Jordan ceiling of 18 months for provincial court matters.

The court apportioned responsibility for a significant period of confusion regarding trial vs. preliminary hearing between the Crown and defence.

The case was not deemed particularly complex to justify the delay.

Consequently, the court found the defendant's s. 11(b) rights were violated and ordered a stay of all charges.

The offender, Enoch Villanueva, was found guilty of aggravated assault for biting off the tip of the victim's finger during an altercation.

The court considered sentencing principles, aggravating factors (violence, permanent disfigurement, ongoing victim impact, offender reigniting the fight, and returning to the scene), and mitigating factors (family support, expressed remorse, no prior criminal record).

The court rejected the defence's request for a 90-day intermittent sentence, finding it insufficient for denunciation and deterrence given the severity and lasting impact of the injury.

The Crown sought 8-9 months.

The court imposed a sentence of 6 months jail, followed by 2 years probation with conditions including anger management, a DNA order, a 10-year weapons prohibition, and a no-contact order with the victim during custody.

The Offender, Ricky Simpson, pleaded guilty to assault and distributing an intimate image without consent.

The court considered aggravating factors including the violence of the assault, its intimate partner context, the significant impact on the victim, and the offender's prior domestic violence conviction.

Mitigating factors included the guilty plea (though late in the trial process) and family support.

The court also assessed pre-sentence custody credit (Summers credit) and additional mitigation for time on bail (Downes credit) and harsh custody conditions (Duncan credit) due to lockdowns and overcrowding during the pandemic.

The judge imposed a 7-month conditional sentence, credited with 95 days pre-sentence custody, followed by two years of probation, and a 5-year weapons prohibition.

The defendant was charged with aggravated assault for biting off the complainant's fingertip during an altercation, claiming self-defence.

The court found that the defendant's act of biting was not for the purpose of self-defence, as the complainant had ceased fighting and was attempting to disengage.

The defendant's testimony was rejected due to inconsistencies and lack of candour, while the corroborating evidence of a third-party witness was accepted.

The Crown successfully disproved the self-defence claim beyond a reasonable doubt, resulting in a conviction for aggravated assault.

The defendant was charged with operating a conveyance with an excess blood alcohol concentration following a collision.

The central issue was the admissibility of the defendant's admission to police that he was driving, which he argued was compelled by the Highway Traffic Act.

The court found that the defendant's statement identifying himself as the driver was a compelled utterance under the Highway Traffic Act, given his honest and reasonable belief in the statutory duty to report the accident.

Applying the principles of the Charter, specifically section 7 (right against self-incrimination) and section 24(1) (exclusion of evidence rendering trial unfair), the court ruled that the compelled statement was inadmissible to prove the identity of the driver.

As there was no other evidence to establish identity, the defendant was found not guilty.

The court also addressed, but did not rely on, concerns regarding the ASD testing procedure, reaffirming that the lawfulness of a demand does not affect the admissibility of a breathalyzer certificate if the demand was acceded to.

The Crown applied for a common law peace bond against the respondent, Bruce Peters, who agreed to the resolution.

The Crown also sought confirmation that R. v. Mousseau, 2011 ONCJ 222, no longer impedes the issuance of such orders.

The court found that a common law peace bond is more than an order for the payment of money and can be enforced under s. 127(1) of the Criminal Code.

The court concluded that Mousseau has been superseded by subsequent binding caselaw and does not bar the use of common law peace bonds.

The peace bond was granted.

The offender pleaded guilty to multiple child pornography and sexual assault charges involving his young biological children.

The court emphasized denunciation and deterrence as primary sentencing considerations, citing R. v. Friesen for the need for increased sentences in child abuse cases.

The judge expressed concern over the family's minimization of the victims' harm and the lack of adequate counselling.

A global sentence of 9 years incarceration was imposed, along with ancillary orders including DNA sample, lifetime SOIRA registration, and a 10-year weapons prohibition.

This sentencing decision addresses the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the implementation of intermittent sentences.

The offender pleaded guilty to assault causing bodily harm and assault.

During judicial pre-trials, an intermittent sentence was discussed, but due to the Elgin Middlesex Detention Centre (EMDC) not accepting intermittent prisoners during a COVID-19 outbreak, the judge revisited the sentencing position.

The court ruled that the current inability to serve intermittent sentences as intended constitutes an exceptional circumstance allowing a judge to deviate from a pre-trial agreement.

The judge offered the offender a choice between a 90-day non-intermittent jail sentence or an adjournment to potentially serve an intermittent sentence if EMDC resumes accepting prisoners.

The defendant pleaded guilty to eleven criminal offences including uttering counterfeit currency on two separate occasions, fraud under $5,000, multiple breaches of court orders, break and enter into a dwelling house, and assault on an intimate partner.

The court imposed a global sentence of 15 months custody followed by 24 months probation, with ancillary orders including a lifetime weapons prohibition and DNA orders.

The sentencing considered the seriousness of the offences, the defendant's extensive criminal record, the context of intimate partner violence, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on incarceration conditions.