Bail pending appeal denied for serious firearms offences

Coming to a Crown factum near you: "The public is entitled to expect that the courts take guns, and the violence and death that they involve, seriously." See R v Laffin, 2025 ONCA 605 at para 16.

In this decision denying bail pending appeal, Huscroft JA held that although the appellant's grounds of appeal were not frivolous, they were "very weak"--and therefore not enough to overcome the public's interest in the immediate enforcement of criminal judgments. Mr. Laffin was found guilty of possessing 43(!) handguns for the purpose of trafficking. It is not surprising that Huscroft JA described this as an "extremely serious conviction" that engaged the public confidence criterion of bail pending appeal.

Counsel in future cases would do well to remember that Mr. Laffin's offence is on the most serious end of the spectrum. 43 firearms can cause a tremendous degree of carnage. Nothing about this decision changes the fact that "[i]t is only in rare cases that individuals who will attend court if released, and who do not pose a serious risk to the public, should remain in detention pending appeal when they have real arguments to make before it can be finally resolved whether punishment is appropriate": see R v Robson, 2025 ONCA 497 at para 15.