Ontario's top court ruled the mandatory minimum punishment for possession of a prohibited firearm that is loaded or ammunition is accessible constitutes cruel and unusual punishment and struck down the law as unconstitutional.
In a pair of decisions, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled the prosecution need not prove a cellphone was actually being used by a driver before a conviction can be entered for distracted driving. Merely holding one is sufficient.
Lawyers for the Hamilton, Ontario couple appeared before the Ontario Court of Appeal yesterday to argue their clients' sentences were excessive. The pair received sentences that were about double what prosecutors had asked for.
Romeo Phillion, 73, who spent more than 31 years locked up for a crime he says he did not commit, is suing for damages, alleging authorities suppressed evidence of his alibi that could have resulted in an acquittal.