In December of 2016, the 17-year-old complainant was a troubled young woman who wrestled with anxiety, alcohol and thoughts of suicide. On December 28, 2016, the complainant went with the respondents (“TF”, “AE” and a young person who is protected by the YCJA) to a residence and engaged in sexual activity. During the course of the sexual acts, the complainant was assaulted and abused. The three males engaged in various sexual acts including vaginal and oral intercourse. During this time, the complainant was repeatedly struck, verbally abused and violated with an electric toothbrush. Part of th ..read more

R v G.F. In this case, two teenagers (“F” and “B”) were charged with sexually assaulting a 16-year-old female during a camping trip. The issue at trial was whether the female, who had consumed alcohol, had consented to the sexual activities that were carried out by F and B. The female complainant and F both testified but presented very different narratives of the events that took place. The Crown argued that the complainant’s evidence clearly established incapacity due to intoxication and that the complainant did not agree to the sexual activity. F and B argued that the complainant’s narrative ..read more

What are your Section 8 rights? Section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides everyone in Canada the protection against unreasonable search and seizure. This right provides Canadians with their primary source of constitutionally enforced privacy rights and protects citizens against unjustified intrusions upon their privacy interests by the state. The purpose of section 8 is to prevent unjustified searches of individuals before they happen rather than dealing with the infringement after the fact. Section 8 of the Charter states: 8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreason ..read more

On May 29, 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) released its much-anticipated decision dealing with the law of entrapment in the cases of R v Ahmad and R v Williams heard together last fall. The majority ruling provides some clarity over how the entrapment framework is to be applied in  a police drug investigation.  I. Facts Both cases involve police investigations into “dial-a-dope” schemes in Toronto. Dial-a-dope schemes are a way to distribute illicit drugs. The scheme is analogous to a pizza delivery. A consumer calls her dealer requesting an amount and type of drug. The parti ..read more

  Drinking and Driving will Cost you Money Most Canadians understand the serious harm that drinking and driving has on our society. We all know the dangers associated with getting behind the wheel drunk or with too much alcohol in our system. We know it’s dangerous, not just to ourselves, but to other drivers and pedestrians. We also know that drinking and driving is common. Almost everyone has a relative or a friend that has driven with too much alcohol in their system and been caught by the police. Officers in recent years have not only become better at catching impaired drivers but als ..read more

If you are caught driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the province of Ontario, you will be subjected to some of the toughest laws in North America.  Ontario takes great pride in its initiatives to reduce impaired driving.  In 2015, according to Statistics Canada, Ontario reported some of the lowest numbers of alcohol-impaired driving rates nationwide and reported the absolute lowest numbers of all provinces for drug-impaired driving.  While Ontario’s approach has been effective in achieving these goals, finding yourself on the wrong side of it can be terrible and life-changing ..read more

On May 31, 2019, the Supreme Court of Canada handed down an important Charter decision: R. v. Le, 2019 SCC 34. In a 3-2 split decision, the majority of the Court allowed Mr. Le’s appeal and excluded the evidence upon which he was convicted, pursuant to section 24(2) of the Charter. The basis of the exclusion was that the police had infringed Mr. Le’s constitutional right to be free from arbitrary detention, contrary to section 9 of the Charter. The decision provides an in-depth discussion of the point at which informal police questioning becomes an arbitrary detention. Given its finding that t ..read more

In its recent decision in R. v. Barton, 2019 SCC 33, the Supreme Court of Canada heard the appeal of Bradley Barton, an individual who was charged with the first-degree murder of Cindy Gladue. Ms. Gladue, an Indigenous sex worker, died from blood loss due to an 11cm wound in her vaginal wall. The jury acquitted Mr. Barton. The Court of Appeal for Alberta ordered a new trial on first-degree murder. The public discourse surrounding the case largely concerned Ms. Gladue’s status as both an Indigenous woman and a sex worker. The case raised questions as to whether our criminal justice system s ..read more