Wawa hotel disturbance leads to major gun and drug case against two accused
WAWA — A hotel disturbance in Wawa that began as an intimate partner violence call has turned into a major firearms and drug prosecution, with two people from the Sault Ste. Marie area now facing a long list of charges after police say they seized three illegal handguns, ammunition, cash and large quantities of suspected drugs.
The accused were remanded into custody, and the OPP is not releasing their names because the investigation involves intimate partner violence.
Police say hotel room search uncovered handguns, cash and suspected drugs
Superior East OPP and Algoma Paramedic Services were called to a Wawa hotel at about 9:30 a.m. on March 31. Police say one person was first arrested for assault, and a subsequent search warrant on the hotel room led to the seizure of three illegal handguns and ammunition, Canadian currency, a vacuum sealer, digital scales and suspected methamphetamine, cocaine, fentanyl and hydromorphone with an estimated street value of about $142,000.
Police say a 32-year-old accused is charged with multiple firearms offences, counterfeit money, assault-related charges, resisting police, possession of property obtained by crime over $5,000 and four counts of possession for the purpose of trafficking. A second accused, 21, faces firearm charges and one cocaine trafficking count. Both were remanded after bail hearings in Sault Ste. Marie.
All charges remain allegations. Both accused are presumed innocent unless proven guilty in court.
What the most serious charges mean
The most serious count in the release may be the allegation of attempting to choke, suffocate or strangle someone to enable the commission of an indictable offence. Under section 246 of the Criminal Code, that offence is indictable only and carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
The drug-trafficking-related counts are also extremely serious. Section 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act makes it an offence to possess a substance for the purpose of trafficking, and section 5(3) sets the maximum penalty at life imprisonment where the substance is in Schedule I or II. The OPP release says the trafficking counts involve cocaine, fentanyl, methamphetamine and hydromorphone, all alleged as Schedule I substances.
The firearms count alleging possession of a loaded prohibited or restricted firearm, or a prohibited or restricted firearm with readily accessible ammunition, falls under section 95 of the Criminal Code.
That offence is hybrid, meaning the Crown can proceed by indictment or summarily, but if it proceeds by indictment the maximum sentence is 14 years in prison.
The counterfeit money charge is also an indictable offence with a high ceiling. Section 450 of the Criminal Code sets a maximum sentence of 14 years for possessing counterfeit money.
How the other firearms and property charges are punished
Unauthorized possession of a firearm under section 91 is a hybrid offence. If the Crown proceeds by indictment, the maximum penalty is five years in prison.
Possession of a firearm or ammunition contrary to a prohibition order under section 117.01 is also hybrid, with a maximum sentence of 10 years if prosecuted by indictment. In this case, that allegation appears 12 times against the first accused and twice against the second, which could materially affect sentencing if there are convictions.
The breach of firearms regulation charge appears to track section 86(2) of the Criminal Code, which covers contravening firearms storage and related regulations. On indictment, the maximum sentence is two years for a first offence and five years for a second or subsequent offence.
Possession of property obtained by crime over $5,000 is dealt with in sections 354 and 355 of the Criminal Code. If the value is more than $5,000 and the Crown proceeds by indictment, the maximum sentence is 10 years.
Assault, spousal assault and resisting police
Simple assault under section 266 of the Criminal Code carries a maximum penalty of five years if prosecuted by indictment. The “assault – spousal” wording in police releases usually refers to the same basic assault offence, but in an intimate partner case the relationship can become an aggravating factor at sentencing under section 718.2.
Resisting a peace officer under section 129 is another hybrid offence. If the Crown proceeds by indictment, the maximum sentence is two years.
What a judge can actually do at sentencing
The maximum penalties above are the outer limits set by Parliament, not automatic outcomes. If either accused is convicted, the judge would consider the Crown’s election, the facts proven in court, the quantity and type of drugs, the number of firearms, any prior record, whether any prohibition order was already in place, and any aggravating or mitigating factors.
In intimate partner violence cases, abuse of an intimate partner is specifically listed in the Criminal Code as an aggravating circumstance on sentence.
In practical terms, that means the sentencing range could vary sharply from count to count. Some of these offences are hybrid and can be prosecuted less severely; others, like the section 246 choking-related allegation and the Schedule I trafficking counts, expose an accused to the most serious penalties available short of murder and similar crimes.
Why this matters in the region
For Wawa and the North Shore, the case is a reminder that a call first reported as intimate partner violence can uncover a much broader public-safety issue involving firearms, trafficking-level drug quantities and alleged breaches of court-ordered firearm bans. That makes it both a domestic-violence case and a significant regional crime file.
