Pot dealer uses legalization promise to argue against jail
With changes to marijuana laws on the horizon, a former star athlete’s lawyers argue that sending him to jail for marijuana trafficking would shock the community and violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Seamus John Neary, 25, was in Saskatoon Court of Queen’s Bench Tuesday for sentencing arguments after he was found guilty of trafficking 9.5 kilograms of marijuana. The crime does not carry a mandatory minimum, but federal law changes in 2012 removed the option of a conditional sentence order, or jail sentence served in the community, for trafficking more than three kilograms of pot.
B.C.-based lawyer John Conroy argued that since then, “the context has changed,” referring to mandate letters sent by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in November to cabinet ministers, including Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould, directing them to work on legalizing marijuana.
“Considering the change, of planning to legalize, it elevates the consequences to a point where it would shock the conscience of the community (to send Neary to jail),” Conroy said.
The Charter-based challenge to the sentencing provisions may not have to come into play, however, if Justice Shawn Smith accepts the position of Neary’s co-counsel, Chris Lavier, who argued a threeyear probation order would be the appropriate sentence.
Probation is an available sentence, although the sentencing range set by the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal for larger-scale marijuana trafficking involves jail time.
Lavier pointed to Neary’s extensive volunteering in the community, his academic achievements in university and his football career as reasons the judge should consider probation. After five years with the University of Saskatchewan Huskies, ending in the fall of 2013, Neary was invited to the CFL Combine in 2015, where top football prospects undergo testing. He was also invited to try out for the B.C. Lions and Saskatchewan Roughriders.
All those invitations were revoked because of his criminal matters, however, showing Neary is already paying a price for his bad choices, Lavier argued.
“I suggest he does fit in this very narrow place where you could, with confidence, fashion a probation order that would have teeth ... and keep him under the watchful eye of the justice system,” Lavier said. He argued conditions such as house arrest or electronic monitoring, plus community service, would send an effective message.
Crown prosecutor Wade McBride argued Neary’s exceptional personal history should be seen as a double-edged sword, not just as something in Neary’s favour.
“People who have all the advantages should not be doing this,” McBride said. “Those are the people ... who need to be deterred.”
Regarding Conroy’s constitutional argument, McBride argued it contained a fatal flaw, because there is no mandatory minimum in place. The sentencing provisions allow a probation order, which McBride argued was not appropriate for Neary, but which “narrows the whole prospect of jail versus conditional sentence order to be somewhat of a moot point.”
Even under any potential new marijuana laws, McBride said he would speculate that commercial trafficking enterprises like Neary’s would not be tolerated. He argued for a jail sentence of between 15 and 18 months.
Smith is scheduled to give his sentencing decision on June 23.