A driver who beat and killed a woman and her three young daughters in Brampton, Ontario two years ago, is challenging her conviction for drug driving charges as well as her conviction.
In a notice of appeal filed last month, Brady Robertson’s attorney alleges that the trial judge erred in maintaining the constitutionality of Canada’s law that sets a legal limit for THC concentration. in blood when driving.
The notice says Robertson seeks to have the section of the law related to blood THC concentrations declared invalid and his convictions for impaired driving overturned.
Robertson, 22, was sentenced in May to 17 years in prison, minus nearly three years of credit for the time already served. He is also banned from driving for 20 years after his release.
Robertson had pleaded guilty to four counts of dangerous driving that resulted in death in connection with the June 18, 2020 crash that killed Karolina Ciasullo and her daughters Klara, Lilianna and Mila, who were between six and one years.
But he pleaded not guilty to four charges of operation while deteriorating for death-causing drugs, and his lawyers challenged the constitutionality of the drug driving law.
During the trial, Ontario Court Judge Sandra Caponecchia found that Robertson had a blood THC concentration of 40 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood about 45 minutes after the accident, which is eight times the limit. legal.
Karolina Ciasullo and her three daughters Klara, Liliana and Mila were killed after their SUV was hit by Robertson’s vehicle. (GoFundMe / CBC)
The constitutional challenge was rejected earlier this year, leading to a guilty verdict on the impaired driving charges.
Robertson was also found guilty of dangerous driving in another accident that occurred on June 16, 2020.
Robertson is also seeking permission to appeal his sentence, arguing in the notice that the imposition is “unfit and excessively harsh.”
The paper also argues that Caponecchia erred in ignoring the precedent principle in the judgment.
The document further argues that the judge erred in finding that the principle of restraint, which states that the less severe but reasonable sentence should be imposed, did not “play a role in a person’s conviction. young and indigenous “. He argues that the sentence should be reduced to one that is “fit.”
Robertson’s attorney did not immediately respond to a request for comment.