Stephen Oakey

Jeffrey Persad pleaded guilty to firearms and drug trafficking offences.

The parties jointly submitted a nine-year imprisonment sentence, with standard credit for presentence custody.

The dispute centered on enhanced credit for harsh conditions at the Toronto South Detention Centre (TSDC), where the offender experienced frequent lockdowns due to staff shortages.

The Crown proposed an additional 0.5:1 credit for lockdown days, while the offender sought 2.5:1.

The court, acknowledging the inhumane and persistent conditions at the TSDC as deliberate state misconduct, awarded an enhanced credit of 1.5:1 for each of the 475 lockdown days, in addition to the standard 1.5:1 credit for 1010 days in custody.

The final sentence was nine years, effectively reduced to 33 months after all credits.

The accused was found guilty by a jury of possession of heroin, cocaine, and crack cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, and possession of proceeds of crime.

The offences occurred when police executed a search warrant at an apartment being used as a commercial drug operation, and the accused was observed throwing drugs from the balcony.

The Crown sought a four-year penitentiary sentence, while the defence proposed three to three and a half years.

The court considered the accused's lack of a criminal record, family support, and remorse as mitigating factors, but emphasized denunciation and deterrence given the significant quantities of highly addictive drugs.

The accused was sentenced to 3.5 years in custody, with credit for one year of pre-sentence custody.

The appellant was convicted by jury of attempting to knowingly participate in or contribute to the activities of Al-Shabaab, a terrorist group, and counselling an undercover police officer to do the same.

The trial judge imposed consecutive sentences of five years on each count, resulting in a total sentence of 9 years and 7.5 months with credit for presentence custody.

The appellant appealed both conviction and sentence.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in the conviction grounds and upholding the sentence as fit and appropriate for terrorist offences.

Samuel Kebede brought a Garofoli application to exclude drug evidence, arguing that the search warrant was invalid due to material misrepresentations in the information to obtain (ITO) and insufficient informant information, thereby violating his s. 8 Charter rights.

The court found two minor, good-faith misrepresentations in the ITO that were not material to the justice of the peace's decision to issue the warrant.

The court also determined that the confidential informant tips were sufficiently compelling, corroborated, and credible, despite some weaknesses in credibility and corroboration, especially given the urgency associated with firearms.

The application to exclude evidence was dismissed, as the process of obtaining the warrant was not found to be subversive of the prior authorization system.

The applicant sought a review under s. 520 of the Criminal Code of bail conditions imposed by a Superior Court judge.

The applicant was charged with drug trafficking and had been released on strict conditions including house arrest, bi-weekly reporting, prohibition on possessing a cellphone, and prohibition on associating with persons with criminal records.

The applicant sought to vary these conditions to permit employment and to possess one cellphone.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the application, holding that absent special circumstances, superior courts should deal with bail matters prior to and during trial, while courts of appeal should deal with bail pending appeal.

The applicant failed to demonstrate special circumstances warranting appellate intervention.