that, from the outset, the case was headed for resolution, not for
trial. Indeed, this was the appellant’s history with all prior incidents. Nor was the appellant in a position to insist on different
conditions on entry of his pleas of guilty. As counsel said in cross-examination, a sentence that aggregated less than six months
inclusive of pre-disposition custody was “impossible” given the
circumstances of the case.
The governing principles
 For the most part, the parties are not at odds about the
principles that govern our decision in this case, only the result
that should follow from their application.
The requirements of a valid guilty plea
 To be valid, a plea of guilty must be voluntary, unequivocal
and informed: Wong, at para. 3; R. v. Quick (2016), 129 O.R. (3d)
334,  O.J. No. 582, 2016 ONCA 95, at para. 4.
The informed guilty plea
 For a plea of guilty to be informed, the accused who enters
it must be aware of the nature of the allegations made by the
Crown and the effect and consequences of the plea: Wong, at
para. 3; Quick, at para. 4; R. v. T. (R.) (1992), 10 O.R. (3d) 514,
 O.J. No. 1914 (C.A.), at p. 519 O.R.
 An informed guilty plea means that an accused must be
aware of the criminal consequences of the plea and the legally
relevant collateral consequences. A legally relevant collateral
consequence is a consequence that bears upon sufficiently serious legal interests of the accused. Immigration consequences
bear on sufficiently serious legal interests, falling within the
legally relevant collateral consequences of a guilty plea: Wong,
at para. 4.
The immigration consequences
 For permanent residents of Canada, s. 36(1)(a) of the
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27
(“IRPA”) declares them inadmissible on grounds of serious crimi-
nality for having been convicted in Canada of an offence under
an Act of Parliament punishable by a maximum term of impris-
onment of at least ten years, or of an offence under an Act of
Parliament for which a term of imprisonment of more than six
months has been imposed.
 Under s. 64(1) of the IRPA, permanent residents found
to be inadmissible to Canada on grounds of serious criminality