R. v. Morgan

R. v. Morgan

The Court refused to disturb the trial judge's exercise of discretion under s.11(b) and concluded that, although a conditional sentence was generally inappropriate given the offences' gravity and deterrence objectives (custody of at least 2 years less a day would be appropriate), the fresh evidence of the offender's good conduct, treatment and family support meant it would not alter the imposed sentence; therefore both appeals were dismissed.

Citation
C38440, C38687
Parties
Respondent on Conviction Appeal Applicant/appellant on Sentence Appeal: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant on Conviction Appeal Respondent on Sentence Appeal: Peter Morgan
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Appeal From Sentence (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Charter S.11(b) Reasonable Time, Conditional Sentence, Sentencing Principles, General and Specific Deterrence, Fresh Evidence at Sentencing
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Charter S.11(b) Reasonable Time Conditional Sentence Sentencing Principles General and Specific Deterrence Fresh Evidence at Sentencing

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent on Conviction Appeal Applicant/appellant on Sentence Appeal

Peter Morgan

Appellant on Conviction Appeal Respondent on Sentence Appeal

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Appeal From Sentence (court of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a breach of s.11(b) (delay) warranting interference with conviction
  2. 2 Whether a conditional sentence was an appropriate sentence given the gravity and seriousness of the offences and principles of sentencing
  3. 3 Whether fresh evidence of post-sentencing conduct and treatment justifies altering the sentence

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused to disturb the trial judge's exercise of discretion under s.11(b) and concluded that, although a conditional sentence was generally inappropriate given the offences' gravity and deterrence objectives (custody of at least 2 years less a day would be appropriate), the fresh evidence of the offender's good conduct, treatment and family support meant it would not alter the imposed sentence; therefore both appeals were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction appeal dismissed
  • Sentence appeal dismissed; no change to sentence