An Ontario judge has approved what he described as a 'very lenient' prison sentence for a drug dealer who used a handgun to terrorize two women during separate violent incidents in the province.
Judge Bound by Joint Sentencing Recommendation
Justice Craig Brannagan of the Ontario Court of Justice sentenced Justin Anderson, 34, to 10 and a half years behind bars. The sentence was a joint recommendation from both the Crown prosecutor and Anderson's defence lawyer, a proposal the judge felt was exceptionally generous given the severity of the crimes.
Justice Brannagan stated that while he found the sentence to be 'a generous one, perhaps even very lenient considering the circumstances of the offences and the offender,' his hands were largely tied. He explained that judges may only reject a joint submission if it is so unreasonable that it would 'bring the administration of justice into disrepute or is otherwise contrary to the public interest.' He concluded the agreed-upon term did not meet that high legal threshold.
Details of the Violent Offences
Anderson pleaded guilty to nine serious indictable offences stemming from two distinct episodes of violence in the spring of 2024.
In late May 2024, Anderson forcibly confined a woman, identified in court documents as R.C., for a week. He forced her to travel with him across Ontario while he sold drugs and made cash deliveries. Throughout the ordeal, Anderson repeatedly flashed a handgun carried in his waistband to control and intimidate her. The woman managed to escape in Vaughan and safely returned to Belleville by train after contacting police.
In a separate incident, Anderson later terrorized another woman at gunpoint. He believed this second victim was a police informant.
The full list of Anderson's guilty pleas includes:
- Forcibly confining two women
- Pointing a firearm
- Possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking
- Breaching a weapons prohibition order
- Possessing a firearm with a defaced serial number
The Legal Precedent of Joint Submissions
In his decision, dated December 11 and released from Barrie, Justice Brannagan emphasized the critical role joint sentencing recommendations play in the justice system. He noted they are 'vital to the operation of the criminal justice system' but are 'not sacrosanct.'
However, the test for a judge to depart from such an agreement is 'undeniably high,' he wrote. The judge must determine if the proposed sentence is 'so unhinged from the circumstances' that it would cause the public to see it as a breakdown of the justice system. In this case, despite his personal view, Justice Brannagan acceded to the joint submission for a 10.5-year prison term.
This case highlights the ongoing tension between judicial discretion and the prosecutorial practice of negotiated sentences, even in matters involving significant violence and weapon offences.
