R. v. Barreira

R. v. Barreira Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2025-02-13 Neutral citation 2025 ONCA 107 Docket numbers COA-24-CR-0933 Judges Rouleau, Paul S.; Paciocco, David M.; Coroza, Steve A. Subject Criminal Decision Content COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: R. v. Barreira, 2025 ONCA 107 DATE: 20250213 DOCKET: COA-24-CR-0933 Rouleau, Paciocco and Coroza JJ.A. BETWEEN His Majesty the King Respondent and Alexander Barreira Appellant Alexander Barreira, acting in person Maija Martin, appearing as duty counsel Erica Whitford, for the respondent Heard and released orally: January 8, 2025 On appeal from the sentence imposed by Justice James Stribopoulos of the Superior Court of Justice on August 23, 2024, with reasons reported at 2024 ONSC 4682. REASONS FOR DECISION [1] The appellant was convicted of possession of a restricted firearm and ammunition, unauthorized possession of a firearm and possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. He was sentenced to 2 years and 11 months’ imprisonment, after credit of 25 months for presentence custody as well as Downes and Duncan credit. [2] He appeals on the basis that he ought to have received additional credit for the lockdowns and conditions he suffered while in detention. [3] In support of this submission, he notes that the sentencing judge did not have all of the institutional records before him. The appellant has now filed additional records showing that there were four additional days of lockdown and four additional days of triple bunking. [4] Further, he alleges that the records are inaccurate and understate the number of days that he was triple bunked and locked down. [5] We see no basis to interfere with the sentencing judge’s conclusion. He was aware of the difficult circumstances that the appellant had suffered. He did not, however, apply a specific formula in determining the credit to be granted. He simply granted 4 months and 21 days of credit. In our view, the additional days in the records that have now been filed with us would not have any impact on the sentence in this case. [6] For these reasons the appeal is dismissed. “Paul Rouleau J.A.” “David M. Paciocco J.A.” “S. Coroza J.A.”