R. v. McKay

R. v. McKay

The court held the pointing of a firearm and the subsequent assault were distinct acts not part of a linked single endeavour because the victim had been subdued when the assault occurred; therefore sentences are to run consecutively. A conditional sentence order of six months was appropriate for the pointing offence because the applicable range was less than two years and community safety would not be endangered; six months' pre‑sentence custody credit was granted on the assault causing bodily harm, leaving one day to serve on that count; ancillary orders including firearm prohibitions and a DNA order were imposed.

Citation
2012 BCSC 2104
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Maya McKay
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing (oral Reasons Following Guilty Pleas)
Outcome
Guilty pleas accepted; sentences imposed: six months custody on assault causing bodily harm (credited six months pre‑sentence custody, one day to serve); six months custody for pointing a firearm to be served in the community on a conditional sentence order, consecutive to the assault sentence; probation for 12...
Legal Topics
Assault Causing Bodily Harm, Pointing a Firearm, Conditional Sentence Order, Concurrent Vs Consecutive Sentencing, Pre‑sentence Custody Credit, Firearm Prohibition, Forensic DNA Order
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Firearms Law Evidence (dna) Assault Causing Bodily Harm Pointing a Firearm Conditional Sentence Order Concurrent Vs Consecutive Sentencing +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Maya McKay

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing (oral Reasons Following Guilty Pleas)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What sentence is appropriate for assault causing bodily harm and pointing a firearm given the facts and offender history
  2. 2 Whether the two sentences should be concurrent or consecutive
  3. 3 Whether a conditional sentence order is appropriate for the pointing a firearm offence

Ratio Decidendi

The court held the pointing of a firearm and the subsequent assault were distinct acts not part of a linked single endeavour because the victim had been subdued when the assault occurred; therefore sentences are to run consecutively. A conditional sentence order of six months was appropriate for the pointing offence because the applicable range was less than two years and community safety would not be endangered; six months' pre‑sentence custody credit was granted on the assault causing bodily harm, leaving one day to serve on that count; ancillary orders including firearm prohibitions and a DNA order were imposed.

Court Disposition

Guilty pleas accepted; sentences imposed: six months custody on assault causing bodily harm (credited six months pre‑sentence custody, one day to serve); six months custody for pointing a firearm to be served in the community on a conditional sentence order, consecutive to the assault sentence; probation for 12...

Orders

  • Count 1 (assault causing bodily harm): six months imprisonment, credited six months pre‑sentence custody, one day remaining to be served today
  • Count 5 (pointing a firearm): six months custody to be served in the community on a conditional sentence order, consecutive to Count 1