R. v. Bingley

R. v. Bingley

Judge found reasonable doubt that Bingley was a knowing co‑principal from the outset and that his moral culpability was reduced by lack of planning and deliberation; found he became aware or ought to have after the assault; applied home invasion aggravator but not the highest range of cases; imposed concurrent five‑year terms on robbery and unlawful entry reduced by pre‑trial credit to an effective concurrent sentence of three years and 269 days; assault and weapons counts set to time served; ordered DNA, lifetime weapons prohibition and no contact with the complainant during sentence.

Citation
2020 BCSC 1118
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Bryden Jim Bingley; Co Accused: Shane George Wilson; Co Accused: Mr. Alvarez
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing / Sentencing (oral Reasons)
Outcome
Sentence imposed following jury conviction: concurrent custodial term on robbery and unlawful entry reduced to effective term by credit; assault and weapons counts set to time served; ancillary orders made.
Legal Topics
Robbery, Unlawful Entry Into Dwelling (home Invasion), Assault, Weapons Possession, Co‑principal Liability Vs Aider/abettor, Pre‑trial Custody Credit, Publication Ban
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Procedure Robbery Unlawful Entry Into Dwelling (home Invasion) Assault Weapons Possession Co‑principal Liability Vs Aider/abettor +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 6 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Bryden Jim Bingley

Accused

Shane George Wilson

Co Accused

Mr. Alvarez

Co Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentencing / Sentencing (oral Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper characterization of accused's role (co‑principal vs aider/abettor) and resulting moral culpability
  2. 2 Appropriate range of sentence for robbery and unlawful entry occurring in an occupied dwelling
  3. 3 Application of home invasion aggravating circumstance (s.348.1)

Ratio Decidendi

Judge found reasonable doubt that Bingley was a knowing co‑principal from the outset and that his moral culpability was reduced by lack of planning and deliberation; found he became aware or ought to have after the assault; applied home invasion aggravator but not the highest range of cases; imposed concurrent five‑year terms on robbery and unlawful entry reduced by pre‑trial credit to an effective concurrent sentence of three years and 269 days; assault and weapons counts set to time served; ordered DNA, lifetime weapons prohibition and no contact with the complainant during sentence.

Court Disposition

Sentence imposed following jury conviction: concurrent custodial term on robbery and unlawful entry reduced to effective term by credit; assault and weapons counts set to time served; ancillary orders made.

Orders

  • Concurrent custodial sentence for unlawfully being in a dwelling house (s.349(1)) and robbery (s.343) of three years and 269 days (effective after credit)
  • Assault (s.266) and possession of a weapon (s.88(1)) recorded as time served