R. v. Trembley

2025 BCSC 2550 R. v. Trembley

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: R. v. Trembley, 2025 BCSC 2550 Date: 20250924 Docket: 33912 Registry: Vancouver Rex v. Jordan Gregory Trembley Before: The Honourable Associate Chief Justice H. Holmes Oral Reasons for Sentence Counsel for the Crown: T.J. Lattimer Counsel for the Accused Trembley: C.B.S. Muldoon Place and Date of Hearing: Vancouver, B.C. September 24, 2025 Place and Date of Judgment: Vancouver, B.C. September 24, 2025

INTRODUCTION [1] THE COURT: Jordan Trembley pleaded guilty last October to two charges: possession for the purposes of trafficking in cocaine (count 8) and possession for the purposes of trafficking in fentanyl (count 9). The task now is to impose sentence. [2] Counsel jointly propose a sentence of two-and-a-half years' incarceration on the cocaine charge and four years' incarceration on the fentanyl charge, those to be served concurrently.

THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFFENCE [3] Mr. Trembley committed the offences in the context of a large-scale drug trafficking operation. During a project-style investigation, Vancouver Police Department officers searched two residences in Vancouver on June 24, 2021. One of those residences, an apartment on Howe Street downtown, was Mr. Trembley's residence. In that residence they found over half a kilogram of fentanyl and fentanyl mixture, over three‑quarters of a kilogram of cocaine, a ten‑ton hydraulic press machine, multiple cellphones, a bolt‑action rifle, and various other drug trafficking paraphernalia. The value of the drugs was, for the fentanyl and mixture, between $65,000 and $125,000, and, for the cocaine, between about $46,000 and $61,000. [4] Counsel agree that Mr. Trembley's role was at the mid‑level in that he was distributing drugs from the apartment to various buyers, doing so by taxi. There is no suggestion that he was the directing mind of the trafficking operation.

THE APPLICABLE LAW [5] The sentencing principles that I must apply are well‑known. Counsel agree that denunciation of the offending conduct and the offences must be primary, along with the deterrence of others and Mr. Trembley from similar offences in the future. However, counsel also agree that additional sentencing principles, including those of restraint and parity, as well as the principles expressed in R. v. Gladue, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688, have a significant role in this case. [6] Counsel agree that for mid‑level fentanyl trafficking offences, our Court of Appeal has outlined a sentencing range of between four and ten years' incarceration: R. v. Bird, 2025 BCCA 300 at para.

49. In doing so, the Court confirmed and clarified the range it had articulated in Campbell, 2021 BCSC 853, where it had established a three to ten year range (at para. 65). [7] Counsel also agree that the jurisprudence establishes a somewhat lower range for cocaine trafficking offences: R. v. MacKay, 209 BCSC 1112 at para. 45. [8] I have been given some helpful examples of somewhat similar cases -- although no other case is ever identical -- that show how the sentencing principles and the jurisprudence have been applied. Those cases include R. v. Kazakoff, 2022 BCSC 2151, R. v. Sanchez, 2023 BCSC 1063, R. v. Flynn, 2024 BCSC 2212, and R. v. Anthony, 2025 BCSC 474 (unreported). [9] I note that in the last three of those cases, sentences were all imposed after joint submissions to the court. [10] Of note also that Flynn and Anthony arose from the same investigation as this case but related to a different stash site where drugs were kept and distributed from. In Mr. Flynn's case, the amount of drugs found in his possession was significantly greater than was found in Mr. Trembley's possession. MR. TREMBLEY'S CIRCUMSTANCES [11] I will not outline separately Mr. Trembley's personal circumstances. Instead, I will address them in the course of describing the mitigating circumstances of the offences.

AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES Aggravating [12] The offences related to Schedule I controlled substances. These are by definition extremely dangerous substances. The two drugs involved have had horrific effects in our society, both on individuals and on the community. We all know this from seeing people we know who have suffered devasting effects, from seeing people we do not know clearly experiencing devasting effects, and from seeing the really harmful effects on downtown and other communities where drugs have ravaged individuals and caused many to act in ways that do not serve them or the community well. [13] While certainly not the directing mind of this organization, Mr. Trembley was intimately involved in it. This is reflected in the fact that his residence was serving as a stash site for the drug trafficking operation. Mitigating [14] There are also a large number of mitigating circumstances. [15] Mr. Trembley is young. He is 24 now; he was 21 at the time of the offences. [16] He has no criminal history of any type. [17] He has pleaded guilty, as I mentioned. He did not do so at the very earliest opportunity but, significantly, he did so before completing his Charter applications and after successfully establishing several Charter breaches in relation to the evidence that the Crown was proposing to tender in the trial. He entered his pleas well before the start

of the trial. [18] Through his pleas Mr. Trembley takes responsibility for the offence. His conduct since the offence also shows that he does so. From his demeanour in the courtroom, it is clear that Mr. Trembley is profoundly aware of the harmful effects of the offences, and that he takes responsibility for them. [19] There are a number of additional personal circumstances for Mr. Trembley that serve as significant mitigating factors. I am not going to address these in detail. They are outlined in the pre-sentence report, marked as exhibit 3, that also addresses a number of Gladue factors. In very brief summary, Mr. Trembley is of Métis heritage. He had a difficult and disadvantaged upbringing during which his father passed away when Mr. Trembley was 12 years old. His father had previously spent periods of time incarcerated. Mr. Trembley lived in a family that faced substance abuse issues, but nonetheless he successfully graduated from high school and also, as a very young person, took on employment. [20] Mr. Trembley's present circumstances are encouraging and also show that he has taken very significant steps toward his rehabilitation since the offences. He has taken on mental health and addictions counselling to help with challenges he faced before. He has been clean and sober. He has established or re‑established strong connections with his mother. He also has established his own family with his partner and now a six‑month-old daughter. He has thus taken on a role as a father. Mr. Trembley has been engaged in stable employment and worked very long hours to try to get a foothold financially. He has reported diligently while on bail and followed the instructions and recommendations of his bail supervisor. These steps are all very encouraging.

THE APPROPRIATE SENTENCE [21] Counsel have given a great deal of consideration to the joint submission they have made to the Court. I have no hesitation in concluding that the proposed sentences are fit, and that they properly reflect the principles of sentencing, the jurisprudence, the moral culpability of Mr. Trembley, and the other relevant circumstances.

SENTENCE [22] Mr. Trembley, would you stand now, please. [23] On count 8, which is the offence of possessing cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, contrary to s. 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, I sentence you to imprisonment for two-and-a-half years. [24] On count 9, which is the same offence but relating to fentanyl, I sentence you to four years' imprisonment. That sentence is to be served concurrently with the sentence on count 8. [25] I make the order of forfeiture that has been proposed. A draft order has been given to the Court with the consent of all relevant parties, one of those being one of your co‑accused. Mr. Lattimer, I have made a minor revision to the front page to correct the name of the judge, and have signed that order, which I give to Madam Registrar. [26] I make an order that you are not to be in possession of any weapons or ammunition for a period ten years. That order is made under s. 109(2) of the Criminal Code. [27] I also make an order that you provide a sample of bodily substance that is suitable for DNA analysis. That order is made under s. 487.051(3)(b) of the Criminal Code. [28] I order that the victim fine surcharge be waived because of your particular circumstances. [29] I also make a recommendation under s. 23(1)(c)(i) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act that the Correctional Service authorities consider you for

placement in the Kwìkwèxwelhp Healing Village located in Harrison Mills. [30] Is there anything else I need to deal with? [31] CNSL T. LATTIMER: The Crown does direct a stay with respect to count 10 on this indictment. Other than that, Associate Chief Justice, there is nothing and I apologize for the typo. [32] CNSL C. MULDOON: No, Associate Chief Justice, thank you. [33] THE COURT: Nothing, Madam Registrar? [34] THE CLERK: No, that is everything. Thank you. [35] THE COURT: All right. Thank you very much. "H. Holmes A.C.J."