R. v. Tremblay

R. v. Tremblay

Given the breach of trust of a vulnerable victim, planning and ongoing deception, the offender's lengthy and serious criminal record including offences while on parole, and the need for specific deterrence and protection of the public, a custodial sentence of 22 months on the fraud count, with concurrent 12‑month sentences on forgery and theft, is proportionate; restitution of $12,400 and a DNA order were appropriate; considerations of parole revocation and totality were taken into account but did not substantially reduce the sentence.

Citation
2014 BCSC 901
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Daniel Joseph Adrien Tremblay
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Fraud, Forgery, Theft / Convicted After Jury Trial; Sentencing (oral Reasons for Sentence)
Outcome
Accused convicted and sentenced following jury verdict; custodial and ancillary orders imposed.
Legal Topics
Breach of Trust, Aggravating and Mitigating Factors, Totality Principle, Loss of Parole Impact, Specific and General Deterrence, Restitution, Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Fraud Forgery Theft Parole and Conditional Release Victim Restitution DNA Orders +7 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 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Daniel Joseph Adrien Tremblay

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Fraud, Forgery, Theft / Convicted After Jury Trial; Sentencing (oral Reasons for Sentence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is a fit and proportionate sentence for multiple fraud/forgery/theft convictions?
  2. 2 Whether sentence should be consecutive to current sentence and effect of parole revocation
  3. 3 Appropriate restitution and ancillary orders (DNA)

Ratio Decidendi

Given the breach of trust of a vulnerable victim, planning and ongoing deception, the offender's lengthy and serious criminal record including offences while on parole, and the need for specific deterrence and protection of the public, a custodial sentence of 22 months on the fraud count, with concurrent 12‑month sentences on forgery and theft, is proportionate; restitution of $12,400 and a DNA order were appropriate; considerations of parole revocation and totality were taken into account but did not substantially reduce the sentence.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted and sentenced following jury verdict; custodial and ancillary orders imposed.

Orders

  • Count 2 (fraud s.380(1)(a)): 22 months custody, consecutive to any sentence currently being served.
  • Count 3 (forgery s.367): 12 months custody, concurrent with Count 2 and consecutive to other sentences.