A woman with a slight smirk on her face being handcuffed by a police officer beside a marked police cruiser, with onlookers and photographers in the background.
Case Summary

A Smirk on the “Eve” of Trial: What R. v. Robinson Gets Right — and What It Glosses Over

Daylo Robinson said nothing during the video call — he just smirked. That was enough for the Ontario Court of Appeal to uphold his conviction for breaching a no-contact release condition. The court called a directed facial expression “inherently” communicative. Given the timing and what followed, the result is defensible but the reasoning deserves a closer look.

SCC
Case Summary, Legal News, SCC

SCC Restores Six-Month Mandatory Minimum for Obtaining Sexual Services from a Minor and Narrows the Road to Challenging It

In a 7-2 split, the Supreme Court of Canada has reinstated the six-month mandatory minimum for obtaining sexual services from a minor, overturning the Quebec Court of Appeal’s finding that it was unconstitutional. The bigger story for defence counsel isn’t the outcome in Denis itself — it’s how the Court rebuilt the reasonable-hypothetical test on the way there, stripping out sympathetic facts before weighing proportionality and setting a tougher bar for the next mandatory-minimum challenge.

Firearms and drugs used to murder
Case Summary

R v Okeymow, 2026 ABKB 406

In R v Okeymow, a man who illegally sold a rifle to a troubled teenager was convicted of manslaughter when that teenager later killed two police officers. The court held the firearm sale was a significant contributing cause and that the shooter’s conduct did not sever the chain. Defence lawyers in firearms and drug-death files need to read this one carefully — the Crown’s causation theory just got stronger.

Challenging an unfair PSR
Case Summary

R. v. Desormeaux – Unfair PSR Challenged

Pre-sentence reports carry weight well beyond the sentencing hearing — correctional and parole authorities rely on them throughout a client’s sentence. In R. v. Desormeaux, Justice Doyle struck a defective PSR in its entirety and ordered a fresh one from a different probation officer, providing the clearest Ontario articulation to date of when structural relief is warranted. Here is what defence counsel should be looking for every time a PSR lands on their desk.

Superior Court of Canada
Case Summary, SCC

R. v. Berg, 2026 SCC 21: The Supreme Court Reins In Misuse of J.J.R.D. in W.(D.) Analyses

In R. v. Berg, 2026 SCC 21, the Supreme Court unanimously held that trial judges should not rely on R. v. J.J.R.D. when structuring W.(D.) analyses or directing juries. The Court confirmed that a conviction cannot rest on a “considered and reasoned acceptance” of a complainant’s testimony alone — proof beyond a reasonable doubt always demands more. A must-read for defence counsel in any credibility-driven trial.

Impaired Female Driver
Case Summary

R v Wilson [2026] OJ No 1514

R v Wilson, 2026 ONCJ 211 is the most significant DRE case since Bingley. An Ontario Court of Justice acquitted on a Refuse Demand charge after finding that skipping Step 1 of the 12-Step Drug Influence Evaluation — the breath alcohol test — means the evaluation was never completed, the demand was invalid, and the Crown’s case collapses at the threshold. The Court also dismantled the officer’s polydrug opinion indicator by indicator, rejected five General Indicators as speculation, and issued a pointed warning about confirmation bias built into the DRE program itself. Essential reading for any defence lawyer handling impaired driving or refuse charges involving a DRE.