R. v. McInnis

R. v. McInnis

The court accepted the joint recommendation because it did not find that the recommended aggregate sentence of two years plus one day would bring the administration of justice into disrepute; given that the recommended term equaled more than two years, a conditional sentence and probation were legally not permissible under ss. 742.1 and 731(1)(b) of the Criminal Code, and the specified concurrent and consecutive component sentences produced a total custody term of two years and one day.

Citation
2015 NSPC 89
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Lawrence John Leonard MacInnis
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
Accused pleaded guilty to listed counts and was sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of two years and one day.
Legal Topics
Assault on Prison Staff, Being Unlawfully at Large (awol), Theft/shoplifting, Possession of Property Obtained by Crime, Probation Breach, Joint Sentencing Recommendation, Consecutive and Concurrent Sentences, Conditional Sentence Eligibility, Victim Surcharge and Fines
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Assault on Prison Staff Being Unlawfully at Large (awol) Theft/shoplifting Possession of Property Obtained by Crime Probation Breach Joint Sentencing Recommendation +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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Lawrence John Leonard MacInnis

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should accept the joint recommendation or depart on basis that it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute
  2. 2 Whether a conditional sentence is legally permissible given the recommended term
  3. 3 Appropriate total length and structure (concurrent vs consecutive) of imprisonment given seriousness and prior record

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted the joint recommendation because it did not find that the recommended aggregate sentence of two years plus one day would bring the administration of justice into disrepute; given that the recommended term equaled more than two years, a conditional sentence and probation were legally not permissible under ss. 742.1 and 731(1)(b) of the Criminal Code, and the specified concurrent and consecutive component sentences produced a total custody term of two years and one day.

Court Disposition

Accused pleaded guilty to listed counts and was sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of two years and one day.

Orders

  • Case 2848758 (assaulting prison staff): 6 months imprisonment (starting point)
  • Case 2857072 (AWOL count 1): 6 months imprisonment, to be served consecutively