R. v. Angers

R. v. Angers

The court found beyond a reasonable doubt that the offender met the statutory definition of a dangerous offender under s.753(1)(a)(i) and s.753(1)(b) because his convictions form part of a pattern of repetitive sexual offending against children, he is diagnosed as a paedophile with a high risk to re-offend, has repeatedly breached supervision and probation, lacks insight and contrition and is manipulative and deceptive; determinative evidence and preferring the expert opinion that assessed him as high risk justified declaring him a dangerous offender and imposing indeterminate detention to protect the public.

Citation
2003 BCSC 2014
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Michael Lynnwood Angers
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 April 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Dangerous Offender Designation / Dangerous Offender Hearing and Sentencing (oral Reasons for Sentence)
Outcome
Declared a dangerous offender under s.753(1)(a)(i) and s.753(1)(b) of the Criminal Code and sentenced to detention in a penitentiary for an indeterminate period.
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Dangerous Offender Designation, Risk Assessment, Child Pornography, Probation Breaches, Expert Evidence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Sexual Offences Forensic Psychology Sexual Assault Dangerous Offender Designation Risk Assessment Child Pornography +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Michael Lynnwood Angers

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Dangerous Offender Designation / Dangerous Offender Hearing and Sentencing (oral Reasons for Sentence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the predicate offence qualifies as a "serious personal injury offence" under s.752 of the Criminal Code
  2. 2 Whether the offender meets the statutory criteria for a dangerous offender under s.753(1)(a)(i) and s.753(1)(b)
  3. 3 Whether a determinate (long-term offender) disposition could adequately control risk or whether indeterminate detention is required

Ratio Decidendi

The court found beyond a reasonable doubt that the offender met the statutory definition of a dangerous offender under s.753(1)(a)(i) and s.753(1)(b) because his convictions form part of a pattern of repetitive sexual offending against children, he is diagnosed as a paedophile with a high risk to re-offend, has repeatedly breached supervision and probation, lacks insight and contrition and is manipulative and deceptive; determinative evidence and preferring the expert opinion that assessed him as high risk justified declaring him a dangerous offender and imposing indeterminate detention to protect the public.

Court Disposition

Declared a dangerous offender under s.753(1)(a)(i) and s.753(1)(b) of the Criminal Code and sentenced to detention in a penitentiary for an indeterminate period.

Orders

  • Offender declared a dangerous offender pursuant to s.753(1)(a)(i) and s.753(1)(b) of the Criminal Code
  • Sentence of detention in a penitentiary for an indeterminate period