A driver who struck and killed a woman and her three young daughters in Brampton, Ont., two years ago is challenging his conviction on drunken driving charges as well as his sentence.
In a notice of appeal filed last month, Brady Robertson’s lawyer argued that the trial judge erred in upholding the constitutionality of a Canadian law setting a legal limit on the concentration of THC in the blood while driving.
The notice says Robertson wants the section of the law dealing with THC blood concentrations to be invalidated and his drunken driving convictions vacated.
Robertson, 22, was sentenced in May to 17 years in prison, minus nearly three years in credit for time already served. He is also banned from driving for 20 years after his release.
Robertson pleaded guilty to four counts of dangerous driving causing death in connection with the June 18, 2020 crash that killed Carolina Chasulo and her daughters Clara, Liliana and Mila, who were aged between six and one.
But he pleaded not guilty to four counts of operating while impaired by drugs causing death, and his lawyers challenged the constitutionality of the drink-driving law.
During the trial, Ontario Court Justice Sandra Caponecchia found that Robertson had a THC blood concentration of 40 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood about 45 minutes after the crash, eight times the legal limit.
Carolina Chasulo and her three daughters, Clara, Liliana and Mila, were killed after their SUV was struck by Robertson’s vehicle. (GoFundMe/CBC)
A constitutional challenge was rejected earlier this year, resulting in a conviction on the impaired driving charges.
Robertson was also found guilty of dangerous driving in another crash which took place on 16 June 2020.
Robertson is also seeking leave to appeal his sentence, arguing in the notice that the sentence imposed was “inappropriate and unduly harsh.”
The document also claims that Caponecchia erred by disregarding the principle of precedent in sentencing.
The document further alleges that the judge erred in finding that the limitation principle, which states that the lightest but reasonable sentence should be imposed, did not “play a role in the sentencing of a young and indigenous person “. He argued that the sentence should be reduced to one that was “appropriate”.
Robertson’s attorney did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Add Comment