R. v. Yonkman

R. v. Yonkman

Given the accused's early but non‑leadership role, lack of direct involvement in fire setting, the paramount objective of general deterrence, and application of double credit for pre‑sentence custody resulting in roughly 22 months' credit (exceeding the 18‑month before‑credit sentence the court would impose), the appropriate sentence is time served.

Citation
2005 BCSC 1842
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Engbert Arthur Yonkman
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing (post Guilty Plea After Trial)
Outcome
Accused sentenced to time served
Legal Topics
Riot (s.65 Criminal Code), General Deterrence, Pre‑sentence Custody Credit, DNA Warrant Applicability, Firearms Prohibition, Property Damage
Source Language
English

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Engbert Arthur Yonkman

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing (post Guilty Plea After Trial)

  1. 1 Appropriate sentence for participation in a prison riot under s.65 Criminal Code
  2. 2 Whether accused was a ringleader or had a lesser role
  3. 3 Whether pre‑sentence custody should be credited (double credit)

Ratio Decidendi

Given the accused's early but non‑leadership role, lack of direct involvement in fire setting, the paramount objective of general deterrence, and application of double credit for pre‑sentence custody resulting in roughly 22 months' credit (exceeding the 18‑month before‑credit sentence the court would impose), the appropriate sentence is time served.

Court Disposition

Accused sentenced to time served

Orders

  • Accused sentenced to time served; pre‑sentence custody credited (approximately 22 months)
  • No DNA warrant ordered (offence not designated)