Soban Ponnampalam

The offender pleaded guilty to possession of fentanyl, heroin, and cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, and possession of proceeds of crime.

The Crown sought a 7-year global sentence, while the defence sought 4 years.

The court emphasized denunciation and deterrence given the large quantities of highly addictive drugs and the offender's prior related record while on parole.

A global sentence of 6 years was imposed, reduced to 4 years and 4 months after applying credits for pre-sentence custody, harsh lockdown conditions, and restrictive bail conditions.

The offender was convicted of trafficking in a controlled substance (fentanyl and heroin) after acting as a courier for a half-kilogram package.

Prior to sentencing, the offender applied to reopen the trial based on fresh psychiatric and psychological evidence suggesting intellectual limitations and depression affected her testimony.

The court dismissed the application, finding the expert evidence inadmissible as oath-helping and not sufficiently cogent to affect the verdict.

On sentencing, the Crown sought 8 years while the defence sought a conditional sentence.

The court emphasized the gravity of commercial fentanyl trafficking but considered the offender's unique mitigating circumstances, including her lack of criminal record, restrictive bail conditions, and mental health issues.

The court imposed a sentence of 5 years in custody.

This ruling addresses several pre-trial applications in a criminal case where the accused, H.H., is charged with procuring a minor for sexual services and other sex trade related offences.

The Crown sought to admit the complainant's video statement under s. 715.1 of the Criminal Code and the accused's statement, arguing its voluntariness.

The accused sought to adduce Instagram photos under s. 278.93 and cross-examine the complainant on prior sexual activity under s. 276.

The court granted the Crown's s. 715.1 application by consent and found the accused's statement voluntary, admitting it into evidence.

The accused's s. 278.93 application was dismissed as the photos were not "records" with a reasonable expectation of privacy.

The s. 276 application was also dismissed, as the proposed evidence of prior sexual activity was deemed irrelevant, perpetuating "twin myths," not specific instances, and its probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger of prejudice to the proper administration of justice.

The accused, S.S., was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference, and inviting a sexual touch involving the complainant, E.M., who was eight at the time of the alleged incident in March 2015.

The defense argued that the Crown's case failed on all three prongs of the R. v. W.(D.) analysis, asserting S.S.'s denial should be accepted or at least not rejected, and E.M.'s evidence was unreliable.

The Crown contended S.S.'s evidence was implausible and evasive, and E.M.'s testimony was credible despite minor inconsistencies.

The court found S.S.'s evidence reasonable and did not reject his denial, concluding that the Crown failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt due to the unreliability and improbability of the complainant's account regarding material details and the mechanics of the alleged events.