R. v. Sinclair

R. v. Sinclair

The judge accepted the expert's assessment of moderate to high static risk based on Sinclair's criminal record but rejected the expert's conclusion that the offence was voyeuristic because the Crown had not met the beyond‑reasonable‑doubt standard for intent at sentencing; applying a three‑year benchmark for occupied‑dwelling break and enter and weighing the aggravating effect of ten prior break‑ins and a prior four‑year sentence, the appropriate sentence was fixed at five years with remand credit; the Crown's DNA request under s.487.051(1) was authorized and the victim surcharge was waived.

Citation
2013 NSSC 86
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Barry Edward Sinclair
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal (break and Enter) / Sentencing (oral)
Outcome
Convicted; sentenced to five years imprisonment with credit for remand from March 1, 2012; DNA order granted; victim surcharge waived; publication ban in effect.
Legal Topics
Break and Enter, Voyeurism, Risk Assessment, Expert Opinion, DNA Order, Publication Ban
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Evidence Break and Enter Voyeurism Risk Assessment Expert Opinion DNA Order +1 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Barry Edward Sinclair

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (break and Enter) / Sentencing (oral)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate sentence for break and enter into occupied dwelling
  2. 2 Weight and relevance of a paper forensic risk assessment (static vs dynamic risk)
  3. 3 Whether Crown can rely on expert opinion at sentencing to prove intended purpose of offence

Ratio Decidendi

The judge accepted the expert's assessment of moderate to high static risk based on Sinclair's criminal record but rejected the expert's conclusion that the offence was voyeuristic because the Crown had not met the beyond‑reasonable‑doubt standard for intent at sentencing; applying a three‑year benchmark for occupied‑dwelling break and enter and weighing the aggravating effect of ten prior break‑ins and a prior four‑year sentence, the appropriate sentence was fixed at five years with remand credit; the Crown's DNA request under s.487.051(1) was authorized and the victim surcharge was waived.

Court Disposition

Convicted; sentenced to five years imprisonment with credit for remand from March 1, 2012; DNA order granted; victim surcharge waived; publication ban in effect.

Orders

  • Sentence: 5 years incarceration with credit for remand from March 1, 2012
  • DNA sample to be taken under s.487.051(1) of the Criminal Code