R. v. Bingley

R. v. Bingley

The judge applied sentencing objectives emphasizing denunciation and deterrence for home‑invasion offences, gave significant weight to parity with co‑accused (noting Alvarez and Bingley sentences), and considered Gladue mitigation; balancing aggravating facts (weapons, masking) against mitigating factors (plea, identity issues, Gladue background), the judge fixed a fit global term of three years on the robbery and dwelling‑house counts with 12 months concurrent on the masking count, then applied pretrial custody credit resulting in a net custodial sentence of one day and two years probation; ancillary orders for DNA and lifetime weapons prohibition were imposed and the victim fine...

Citation
2020 BCSC 2218
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Shane George Wilson; Co Accused/convicted: Bryden Jim Bingley
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal: Robbery, Dwelling‑house Offence, Masking / Sentencing (oral Reasons for Sentence)
Outcome
Convictions on Counts 2 (unlawfully in dwelling house), 3 (robbery), and 6 (masking). Sentence fixed at three years custody (robbery and dwelling‑house) with 12 months concurrent on masking, net sentence after pretrial custody credit of one day custody followed by two years probation.
Legal Topics
Robbery, Unlawful Entry/dwelling House, Masking/offence of Wearing a Mask, Home Invasion, Gladue Considerations, Pretrial Custody Credit, Parity Principle, Ancillary Orders (dna, Weapons Prohibition)
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Robbery Unlawful Entry/dwelling House Masking/offence of Wearing a Mask Home Invasion Gladue Considerations Pretrial Custody Credit +2 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Shane George Wilson

Accused

Bryden Jim Bingley

Co Accused/convicted

Procedural Posture

Criminal: Robbery, Dwelling‑house Offence, Masking / Sentencing (oral Reasons for Sentence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the fit sentence for robbery, unlawful entry and masking in a home‑invasion context?
  2. 2 How should parity with co‑accused sentences be applied?
  3. 3 How should Gladue factors be weighed for an Indigenous offender?

Ratio Decidendi

The judge applied sentencing objectives emphasizing denunciation and deterrence for home‑invasion offences, gave significant weight to parity with co‑accused (noting Alvarez and Bingley sentences), and considered Gladue mitigation; balancing aggravating facts (weapons, masking) against mitigating factors (plea, identity issues, Gladue background), the judge fixed a fit global term of three years on the robbery and dwelling‑house counts with 12 months concurrent on the masking count, then applied pretrial custody credit resulting in a net custodial sentence of one day and two years probation; ancillary orders for DNA and lifetime weapons prohibition were imposed and the victim fine...

Court Disposition

Convictions on Counts 2 (unlawfully in dwelling house), 3 (robbery), and 6 (masking). Sentence fixed at three years custody (robbery and dwelling‑house) with 12 months concurrent on masking, net sentence after pretrial custody credit of one day custody followed by two years probation.

Orders

  • Victim fine surcharge waived if applicable