Ontario Criminal


Sentence imposed entirely fit after largest GHB seizure in Canadian history

Accused applied for leave to appeal sentence of five years’ imprisonment, after one year’ credit for pre-trial custody and stringent conditions of pre-trial release, imposed after he was convicted of conspiracy to traffic in 4-Hydroxybutanoic acid (“GHB”). Accused submitted that trial judge erred by treating as aggravating factor on sentencing fact that GHB is commonly used to put into drinks of unsuspecting third parties, mainly women, so as to render them unable to effectively resist others who seek to take sexual advantage of them. Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed. In facilitating payment for GHB, accused was willing participant in conspiracy to utilize GHB in whatever manner might follow, including its potential use as date-rape drug. Quantity of GHB seized was enormous: approximately 600 litres; at time of trial, it was largest GHB seizure in Canadian history. Trial judge made no error in his sentencing analysis and sentence imposed was entirely fit.

R. v. Sansalone (Apr. 10, 2013, Ont. C.A., Janet Simmons J.A., E.A. Cronk J.A., and E.E. Gillese J.A., File No. CA C54341) 106 W.C.B. (2d) 483.

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?