Decisions

Subscribe to the RSS Feed for Ontario Court of Justice Decisions

• New Decisions : Ontario Court of Justice

Ontario Court of Justice Recent Decisions

• 2025-11-26 R. v. Ahmad, 2025 ONCJ 620 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Criminal infractions — Sentencing — Assault by parent against child — Aggravating and mitigating factors — Father convicted of assaulting his daughter, aged 12-13, in the family home — Seriousness of offence, breach of trust, and impact on victim considered — Is a jail sentence necessary to address denunciation and deterrence? — Sentence of 30 days jail imposed, served intermittently — Criminal Code, ss. 718, 718.1, 718.2<br />Family — Sentencing — Collateral consequences — Parent convicted of assaulting child — Potential loss of employment and family separation raised as mitigating factors — Do collateral consequences justify a reduction in sentence? — Court held that collateral consequences did not outweigh the seriousness of the offence or the need for denunciation and deterrence<br />Child protection — Conditional discharge — Assault by parent against child — Father sought conditional discharge for assaulting daughter — Lack of remorse and acceptance of responsibility — Is a conditional discharge appropriate in cases of parental assault? — Court found discharge contrary to public interest due to seriousness of offence and ongoing impact on victim — Criminal Code, s. 730<br />Criminal procedure — DNA order — Secondary designated offence — Assault by parent against child — Discretionary DNA order imposed — Does the imposition of a DNA order serve the administration of justice? — Court found DNA order appropriate given seriousness of offence and lack of insight by offender — Criminal Code, s. 487.051(3)
• 2025-11-26 R. v. Camara, 2025 ONCJ 619 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Evidence — Admissibility of expert opinion evidence — Drug trafficking — Crown sought to admit expert evidence from Detective Constable Goch regarding cocaine and fentanyl trafficking — Defence challenged admissibility on grounds of necessity and qualifications — Framework for admissibility of expert evidence under R. v. Mohan and White Burgess — Expert evidence found necessary and relevant to assist the court — Benefits of admitting evidence outweighed potential costs — Expert evidence admitted for cocaine and fentanyl trafficking<br />Evidence — Expert qualifications — Drug trafficking — Detective Constable Goch proposed as expert in cocaine and fentanyl trafficking — Defence argued officer lacked sufficient expertise — Court considered officer’s training, experience, and consultations with colleagues — Holistic assessment of qualifications — Officer found properly qualified to testify as expert in cocaine and fentanyl trafficking<br />Evidence — Admissibility of expert opinion evidence — Oxycodone trafficking — Crown sought to admit expert evidence on oxycodone trafficking despite staying related charge — Defence challenged relevance of oxycodone evidence — Court found no logical relevance to material issues in case — Expert evidence on oxycodone trafficking excluded
• 2025-11-25 R. v. Henderson, 2025 ONCJ 615 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Criminal procedure — Arrest — Breath demand — Reasonable and probable grounds — Police observed accused swerving, throwing a beer can, slurred speech, and unsteady gait — Did the officer have sufficient grounds to arrest the accused and demand breath samples? — Totality of circumstances test applied — R. v. Bush, 2010 ONCA 554 — Arrest and demand found lawful<br />Constitution — Charter of Rights — Section 10(b) — Right to counsel — Police diligence — Accused alleged police failed to assist in locating phone to contact counsel of choice — Police repeatedly asked accused about phone and lawyer but received unclear responses — Did police fail their implementational duties under s. 10(b)? — No breach found — R. v. Willier, 2010 SCC 37<br />Constitution — Charter of Rights — Section 10(b) — Duty counsel — Police failed to offer reconnection after accused stated duty counsel hung up — Did this omission breach the accused’s s. 10(b) rights? — Breach found — Police failed to confirm satisfaction with legal advice or offer reconnection — Right to counsel violated<br />Constitution — Charter remedies — Section 24(2) — Exclusion of evidence — Breath samples obtained after s. 10(b) breach — Seriousness of breach, impact on accused, and societal interest in adjudication considered — Evidence excluded to preserve Charter integrity — R. v. Grant, [2009] 2 S.C.R. 353<br />Criminal infractions — Impaired operation — Proof beyond a reasonable doubt — Accused swerved, slurred speech, unsteady gait, and admitted alcohol consumption — Did the Crown prove impairment beyond a reasonable doubt? — Evidence sufficient to establish impairment — Conviction entered — R. v. Stellato, (1993) 12 O.R. (3d) 90<br />Criminal infractions — Dangerous operation — Proof beyond a reasonable doubt — Crown did not pursue submissions on dangerous operation — Driving conduct did not meet threshold for dangerousness — Charge dismissed
• 2025-11-25 R. v. Cosentino, 2025 ONCJ 616 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Criminal procedure — Arrest — Reasonable and probable grounds — Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) demand — Police arrested the accused for impaired operation of a conveyance and issued a DRE demand — Did the police have reasonable and probable grounds for the arrest and demand? — Officers’ subjective and objective grounds for arrest analyzed — Criminal Code, s. 320.28(2)(a); Charter, ss. 8, 9<br />Constitution — Charter of Rights — Sections 8, 9, and 10(b) — Unlawful arrest and detention — Accused alleged violations of Charter rights during investigation and arrest — Were the accused’s Charter rights violated? — Police conduct scrutinized for compliance with constitutional standards — Charter remedies under s. 24(1) and s. 24(2)<br />Criminal infractions — Impaired operation of a conveyance — Evidence of impairment — Accused charged with impaired operation by drugs — No direct evidence of drug consumption — Circumstantial evidence insufficient to prove impairment beyond a reasonable doubt — Did the Crown meet its burden of proof? — Criminal Code, s. 320.14(1)(a)<br />Criminal procedure — Refusal to comply with DRE demand — Lawfulness of demand — Accused refused to comply with a DRE demand — Was the refusal lawful due to the alleged unlawfulness of the demand? — Unlawful demands cannot form the basis of an offence — Criminal Code, s. 320.15(1); R. v. Alex, 2017 SCC 37<br />Criminal infractions — Probation order — Breach of "keep the peace and be of good behaviour" — Accused charged with breaching probation order — Insufficient evidence of intentional breach — Did the accused fail to comply with the probation order? — Criminal Code, s. 733.1(1)
• 2025-11-25 R. v. Jackson, 2025 ONCJ 617 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Criminal infractions — Firearm possession — Prohibited devices — Defendant charged with 25 firearm-related offences — Possession of prohibited firearms, ammunition, and devices — Defence of duress raised — Whether the defendant’s possession of firearms was voluntary or coerced — Defence of duress rejected — Defendant found guilty on all counts — Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, ss. 84, 109<br />Constitution — Charter of Rights — Search and seizure — Sections 7 and 8 of the Charter — Defendant alleged police breached Charter rights during search warrant execution — Whether the search warrant was validly issued — Confidential source information and excision of errors in the ITO — Evidence admitted — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss. 7, 8<br />Criminal procedure — Defence of duress — Air of reality — Defendant claimed coercion by a third party to possess firearms and contraband — Whether the defence of duress had an air of reality — No safe avenue of escape found — Defence rejected — R. v. Ryan, 2013 SCC 3; R. v. M. (D.B.), 2016 ONCA 264<br />Evidence — Defence of duress — Burden of proof — Crown disproved duress beyond a reasonable doubt — Contraband distributed throughout the defendant’s apartment — Defendant’s testimony inconsistent with evidence — Lack of corroborating witnesses or documentation — Defence of duress rejected — R. v. Richer, 2025 ONCA 439