Sean Christopher Doyle

The offender pleaded guilty to manslaughter following a mistrial on a first-degree murder charge.

The 19-year-old offender, who had significant mental health and substance abuse issues, shot and stabbed the victim in an unprovoked and brutal attack outside the victim's home.

The court accepted a joint submission for a 14-year penitentiary sentence, finding it proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the offender's high degree of moral blameworthiness, while accounting for his guilty plea and mental health challenges.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a sixth Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by Worldwide Properties (Alliston) Inc. concerning the Town of New Tecumseth's failure to approve site plans within the statutory timeframe.

The parties submitted an updated Procedural Order and Issues List, which the Tribunal approved to govern the proceedings leading up to the scheduled hearing.

The offender, a 23-year-old international student with a G2 licence, was convicted of impaired driving causing death and dangerous driving causing death after striking and killing an off-duty police officer.

The court considered the offender's G2 licence status, which prohibited driving with any alcohol in his system, as a statutory aggravating factor under s. 320.22(g) of the Criminal Code.

Emphasizing denunciation and deterrence for impaired driving offences, the court sentenced the offender to 6 years in the penitentiary, less pre-trial custody credits, and imposed a 10-year driving prohibition.

The applicant applied for a cancellation, reduction, or refund of her 2024 property taxes under s. 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, citing sickness and extreme poverty.

While the Assessment Review Board accepted that the applicant met the definition of extreme poverty based on her income, it found that she was not 'unable to pay' her taxes.

The evidence showed the applicant held approximately $35,000 in an RRSP in 2024, which could have been liquidated to pay the $6,673.88 in levied taxes.

The application was dismissed.

Crown sentence appeal from a decision rejecting a joint submission on sentence for operating a conveyance with a blood-alcohol concentration exceeding 80 mg per 100 ml of blood.

The sentencing judge declined the jointly submitted 60-day conditional sentence and instead imposed a $2,500 fine, finding the proposed sentence disproportionate.

The appeal court held the sentencing judge applied the wrong test by assessing fitness of sentence rather than the public interest test from R. v. Anthony-Cook, which requires that a joint submission only be rejected where it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

The appeal was allowed and the conditional sentence of imprisonment was imposed as originally jointly submitted.

The defendant was charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle causing death, dangerous driving causing death, and operating a motor vehicle with a blood-alcohol concentration over 80 mg/100 mL causing death.

The charges arose from a fatal collision on Major Mackenzie Drive in Markham, Ontario on September 14, 2022, in which the defendant's vehicle crossed the centre line and struck an oncoming vehicle driven by an off-duty police officer, resulting in the officer's death.

The court found the defendant guilty on all counts.

The court rejected the defence argument that falling asleep at the wheel provides an absolute defence to dangerous driving, finding instead that the defendant's decision to drive while tired and under the influence of alcohol constituted a marked departure from the standard of care.

The court also found that the defendant's ability to drive was impaired by alcohol to any degree, satisfying the test for impaired driving.

The blood-alcohol analysis showing 80 mg/100 mL was admitted under the presumption of accuracy.

The applicant applied to the City of Mississauga to have her 2024 property taxes of $5,064.57 cancelled or reduced due to extreme poverty or sickness under s. 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act, 2001.

While the Assessment Review Board found the applicant's monthly income of $730.92 met the threshold for extreme poverty, it determined she was not unable to pay her property taxes.

The applicant had over $14,000 in available bank accounts, which the Board concluded were resources that could be utilized to mitigate her property tax obligations.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant applied to have their 2024 property taxes cancelled, reduced, or refunded due to sickness or extreme poverty under s. 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Assessment Review Board found that the applicant's net income, which included a legal settlement, exceeded their basic living expenses, leaving sufficient funds to cover the taxes.

The applicant also had equity in their property and incurred discretionary expenses.

The application was dismissed as the applicant failed to demonstrate an inability to pay.

The accused was charged with impaired driving causing death and dangerous driving causing death following a fatal head-on collision.

The accused brought a Charter application alleging arbitrary detention and unlawful search and seizure regarding blood samples taken at the hospital.

The Crown brought a voluntariness application regarding statements the accused made to a paramedic and police officers.

The court found the paramedic was not a person in authority and the statements to police were voluntary.

The court also held the accused was not detained prior to his formal arrest and the police had reasonable and probable grounds to arrest him and demand a blood sample based on the totality of the circumstances.

The Charter application was dismissed and the statements were ruled admissible.

Denrick Rose pleaded guilty to dangerous driving causing death and bodily harm, and breaching a release order curfew.

The offence involved driving at speeds exceeding 200 km/h on Highway 400 and King Road, with five passengers, two of whom urged him to slow down.

The vehicle crashed into a light standard, killing passenger Amelia Bal and seriously injuring others.

The Crown sought a 5-year sentence plus a 7-year driving prohibition; the defence sought 2 years plus 5 years prohibition.

The court imposed a global sentence of 4.5 years with a 10-year driving prohibition, considering aggravating factors including deliberate prolonged dangerous driving, breach of bail, and victim impact, balanced against mitigating factors such as the offender’s youth, remorse, strong rehabilitative prospects, and harsh presentence custody conditions.

The decision also addresses the impact of systemic anti-Black racism on sentencing.

The applicant applied to cancel her 2023 property taxes under s. 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, citing an inability to pay due to sickness.

The Assessment Review Board conducted a contextual analysis of her income, expenses, assets, and liabilities.

The Board found that while the applicant demonstrated an inability to pay, she had spent $2,277.76 on discretionary expenses (cigarettes and music store purchases) which could have been used toward her property taxes.

Consequently, the Board allowed the application in part, cancelling $3,290.41 of the $5,568.17 requested, finding the inability to pay that portion was due to sickness.

The Applicant applied to the City of Mississauga for a cancellation, reduction, or refund of his 2023 property taxes, claiming an inability to pay due to sickness or extreme poverty under s. 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Assessment Review Board found that the Applicant's monthly income, supplemented by financial support from his family, exceeded his reported expenses.

Because the Applicant was able to draw upon available resources to meet his financial obligations and successfully paid his 2023 property taxes, the Board concluded he failed to demonstrate an inability to pay.

The application was dismissed.

The Applicant applied to the City of Mississauga to have her 2023 property taxes cancelled, reduced, or refunded due to sickness or extreme poverty under s. 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act, 2001.

The City delegated the application to the Assessment Review Board.

The Board found that the Applicant had a positive bank balance of over $13,000 at the end of 2023 and chose to save the funds rather than pay the $2,388.97 in levied taxes.

The Board concluded the Applicant failed to demonstrate an inability to pay and dismissed the application.

The applicant applied to the City of Mississauga for a cancellation, reduction, or refund of her 2023 property taxes under s. 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, citing an inability to pay due to sickness.

The Assessment Review Board found that while the applicant was sick and unable to work, she had access to a line of credit and credit cards which she used to meet her financial obligations, including paying her property taxes in full for the year.

The Board concluded the applicant failed to demonstrate an inability to pay and dismissed the application.

The applicant applied to the City of Mississauga to have his 2023 property taxes reduced, cancelled, or refunded due to an inability to pay caused by sickness or extreme poverty under s. 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act.

The Assessment Review Board dismissed the application because the applicant failed to comply with a Procedural Order requiring him to provide sufficient financial documentation, such as CRA Notices of Assessment and complete bank and credit card statements, to prove his inability to pay.

The applicant applied to the City of Mississauga to have her 2022 property taxes cancelled, reduced, or refunded due to an inability to pay caused by sickness or extreme poverty under s. 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Assessment Review Board found that the applicant had sufficient financial resources, including a positive bank balance and significant equity in the subject property, to pay the taxes.

The application was dismissed.

The defendant, Emilio Gonzalez-Ramirez, was found guilty of aggravated assault and use of an imitation firearm.

This decision outlines the reasons for sentencing, considering factors such as the complainant's young age, the unprovoked nature of the assault, the use of an imitation firearm, the defendant's mental health issues (schizophrenia), and the significant collateral immigration consequences of a sentence of six months or more.

The court balanced the seriousness of the offence with mitigating factors, including the defendant's mental illness and the harshness of pre-trial custody, ultimately imposing a sentence structured to preserve the defendant's right to appeal a potential deportation order on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.

The requesting party sought to reinstate their application, which was dismissed after they failed to attend a pre-hearing conference.

The requesting party provided evidence of memory loss associated with a medical condition that caused them to forget the hearing.

The municipality took no position.

The Assessment Review Board found that the requesting party failed to appear through no fault of their own and that natural justice required reinstatement under Rules 104 and 105.

The application was reinstated.

The applicant filed an application for property tax cancellation or reduction due to inability to pay under s. 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act.

The applicant failed to attend the scheduled pre-hearing teleconference and did not communicate with the Board or the City despite multiple attempts by the Board to contact her.

The Assessment Review Board dismissed the application for non-attendance pursuant to Rule 104 of its Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The accused was charged with aggravated sexual assault, sexual interference, and use of an imitation firearm in the commission of an indictable offence.

The charges stemmed from an incident in a park where the 14-year-old complainant alleged she was tackled, sexually assaulted, and struck with an imitation firearm.

The accused denied the allegations, claiming the complainant stole his battery charger and fell.

The court found the complainant's evidence credible and rejected the accused's account.

While finding the accused guilty of aggravated assault (a lesser included offence of aggravated sexual assault) and use of an imitation firearm, the court found reasonable doubt regarding the sexual nature of the touching, leading to an acquittal on the aggravated sexual assault and sexual interference charges.