R. v. Snell

R. v. Snell

Given the offender's rehabilitative prospects, lack of public safety risk at the time of the offence, and the availability of conditional sentences under s.742.1, a 12-month conditional sentence was appropriate; absent a s.665 notice the court was limited to a three-year driving prohibition under s.259(1)(a), which the court imposed consecutively to existing prohibitions.

Citation
2014 NSPC 3
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Todd Stewart Snell
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing / Sentencing After Guilty Plea
Outcome
Accused sentenced
Legal Topics
Driving While Prohibited (s.259), Conditional Sentence (s.742.1), Notice of Greater Penalty (s.665), Sentencing Principles (denunciation, Deterrence, Rehabilitation)
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Road Traffic Offences Driving While Prohibited (s.259) Conditional Sentence (s.742.1) Notice of Greater Penalty (s.665) Sentencing Principles (denunciation, Deterrence, Rehabilitation)

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Todd Stewart Snell

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentencing / Sentencing After Guilty Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a conditional sentence is appropriate for a s.259(4) driving-while-prohibited offence with prior driving-related convictions
  2. 2 Proper length and nature of punishment for breach of a court-ordered driving prohibition
  3. 3 Whether the court could impose an elevated driving prohibition absent service of a s.665 notice of greater penalty

Ratio Decidendi

Given the offender's rehabilitative prospects, lack of public safety risk at the time of the offence, and the availability of conditional sentences under s.742.1, a 12-month conditional sentence was appropriate; absent a s.665 notice the court was limited to a three-year driving prohibition under s.259(1)(a), which the court imposed consecutively to existing prohibitions.

Court Disposition

Accused sentenced

Orders

  • Conditional sentence order of 12 months
  • Fine of $1000.00 payable by 2015-01-30