Canada Case Law

R. v. Simmons

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Although the sentencing judge erred in treating the timing of the guilty plea as an aggravating factor, that error did not affect the global six‑year sentence in light of the seriousness of the firearm and drug offences, the appellant's prior firearm conviction and active prohibition, and the judge's proper consideration of mitigation and rehabilitative materials; therefore appellate intervention is not warranted and the sentence is upheld.

Source excerpt

• Guilty plea timing
• Rehabilitative potential
• Denunciation and deterrence
• Aggravating and mitigating factors
• Pre‑trial custody credit (summers/duncan)

Read case analysis

R. v. Thompson

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The appeal is dismissed because the trial judge applied the correct subjective test for wilful blindness and alternatively made a finding of actual knowledge supported by powerful evidence (quantity and value of drugs, concealment in suitcases packed by the appellant, appellant's fingerprint); any alleged error on wilful blindness would be immaterial in light of the alternative finding of actual knowledge, and the other complained-of errors did not affect the verdict.

Source excerpt

• Wilful blindness
• Mens rea
• Importation of drugs
• After-the-fact conduct
• Judicial notice
• Standard of proof

Read case analysis

R. v. Chen

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court convicted Stephen Hai Chen of trafficking MDMA, finding circumstantial evidence and intercepted communications proved six transactions beyond a reasonable doubt.

• Trafficking in drugs
• Circumstantial evidence
• Voice identification
• Co‑conspirator hearsay
• Surveillance evidence
• Continuing offence

Read case analysis

R. v. Bennett

Court

Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal

The trial judge committed an error in principle by failing to consider the appellant's Aboriginal status under s.718.2(e); the Court of Appeal received the Stonebridge Gladue‑type report under s.687(1)(a), concluded individual drug sentences were within range but reduced the May 6, 2011 trafficking term and adjusted for totality, and varied the global sentence to 23 months to be served conditionally (with remand credit and one year probation) because the statutory Gladue requirement had not been considered and a conditional sentence was found appropriate on the evidence before the Court.

Source excerpt

• Sentencing principles
• Gladue / ipeelee considerations
• Conditional sentence
• Totality principle
• Remand credit
• Leave to appeal

Read case analysis

R. v. Borozan

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Although the sentencing judge may have initially misunderstood counsel's submission, the 16 month global sentence was held to be fit in light of the nature of the offence, the quantity and type of drugs and the breach of probation; the judge correctly refused to reduce a fit sentence to avoid adverse immigration consequences, so there was no basis to interfere.

Source excerpt

• Sentencing
• Trafficking
• Probation breach
• Immigration consequences

Read case analysis

R. v. Henareh

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held the Crown was not limited to the admissions filed for conviction and could rely on other relevant facts at sentencing, subject to proof and relevance rules.

• Admissibility of evidence at sentencing
• Use of uncharged offences at sentencing
• Hearsay at sentencing
• Burden of proof for sentencing facts
• Section 725 considerations
• Severance

Read case analysis

R. v. Mitchell

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held the warrant invalid because the ITO contained material inaccuracies and unreliable descriptions, excluded the seized evidence under s. 24(2), and entered an acquittal.

• Warrant validity
• Information to obtain (ito)
• Exclusion under s.24(2) of the charter
• Thermal imaging (flir) evidence
• Odour evidence
• Search-and-seizure

Read case analysis

R. v. Bartley

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from conviction for possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking, finding the jury instructions on inference and proof were not reversible error.

• Possession for the purpose of trafficking
• Knowledge
• Intention
• Standard of proof
• Circumstantial evidence
• Jury questions

Read case analysis

R. v. Adelberg

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding there were reasonable and probable grounds for arrest based on reliable informant information and predictive detail.

• Possession for the purpose of trafficking
• Reasonable and probable grounds to arrest
• Informant reliability
• Search incident to lawful arrest
• Reasonable-and-probable-grounds
• Search-incident-to-arrest

Read case analysis

Osborne v. The Queen

Court

Supreme Court of Canada

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed Osborne’s appeal, upholding a trafficking conviction for amphetamine and finding no legal error in the evidence rulings or the Court of Appeal’s decision.

• Trafficking
• Admissibility of scientific evidence
• Standard graph
• Wiretap evidence
• Video evidence
• Manufacture of controlled substance

Read case analysis