Summaries Sunday: Maritime Law Book

Summaries of selected recent cases are provided each week to Slaw by Maritime Law Book. Every Sunday we present a precis of the latest summaries, a fuller version of which can be found on MLB-Slaw Selected Case Summaries at cases.slaw.ca.

This week’s summaries concern:
Concurrent sentences / Provocation as a defence / Disability and mandatory minimums:

R. v. Keeping (R.C.), NLPC October 16, 2013
Criminal Law – Sentencing – General – Concurrent sentences
After several appearances, the accused pleaded guilty to two counts of possessing child pornography and one count of distributing child pornography. He then withdrew his pleas. On his fourteenth appearance on the docket, some 21 months after being charged, the accused changed his plea to guilty. A joint submission was made for a total sentence of four months’ imprisonment. The Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court sentenced the accused to a total of . . .

R. v. Cairney (M.J.) 2013 SCC 55
Criminal Law – Offences against person and reputation – Murder – Provocation – General principles
The accused was charged with second degree murder after he shot and killed Ferguson with a shotgun. After a jury trial, the accused was acquitted of murder and convicted of the lesser included offence of manslaughter. The Crown appealed the acquittal. The Alberta Court of Appeal, in a decision reported at 513 A.R. 345; 530 W.A.C. 345, allowed the appeal. In the event the Crown elected to continue . . .

R. v. Adamo (M.P.) 2013 MBQB 225
Civil Rights – Discrimination – Mental or physical disability – Sentencing (incl. mandatory minimum sentences)
Police discovered a handgun and some ammunition inside a garden shed on the accused’s property. The accused, who was mentally disabled, was convicted of one count of possession of an unloaded prohibited firearm with readily accessible ammunition (Criminal Code, s. 95(1)). The accused argued that s. 95(2)(a)(i), which imposed a mandatory minimum sentence of three years for a first offence under s. 95(1), was contrary to . . .