R. v. Noor

R. v. Noor

The sentencing judge committed an error in principle by treating unproven dangerous driving as an aggravating factor in sentencing for uttering threats; accordingly the appellate court varied the sentence to a conditional discharge with 12 months probation and a no‑contact condition with the complainant.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2011 BCSC 1629
Parties
Crown/respondent: Regina; Accused/appellant: Brandon Gary Evald Noor
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Summary Conviction Appeal / Sentencing Appeal (s.813 Appeal From Provincial Court Sentence)
Outcome
Sentence varied to a conditional discharge with 12 months probation; no contact condition with the complainant imposed; original custodial exposure/fine set aside in favor of discharge.
Legal Topics
Uttering Threats (s.264.1), Dangerous Operation of a Motor Vehicle (s.249), Conditional Discharge (s.730), Aggravating Factors, Proof of Uncharged Facts (s.724(3)), Appellate Review of Sentence (s.687(1)), Sentencing Objectives (s.718)
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Sentencing Traffic/road Safety Evidence Uttering Threats (s.264.1) Dangerous Operation of a Motor Vehicle (s.249) Conditional Discharge (s.730) Aggravating Factors +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown/respondent

Brandon Gary Evald Noor

Accused/appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Summary Conviction Appeal / Sentencing Appeal (s.813 Appeal From Provincial Court Sentence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sentencing judge erred by treating unproven/different offence (dangerous driving) as an aggravating factor
  2. 2 Whether a conditional discharge was appropriate given plea, lack of record and public interest
  3. 3 Whether appellate court should defer to sentencing judge absent error in principle

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge committed an error in principle by treating unproven dangerous driving as an aggravating factor in sentencing for uttering threats; accordingly the appellate court varied the sentence to a conditional discharge with 12 months probation and a no‑contact condition with the complainant.

Court Disposition

Sentence varied to a conditional discharge with 12 months probation; no contact condition with the complainant imposed; original custodial exposure/fine set aside in favor of discharge.

Orders

  • Sentence varied to a conditional discharge for the offence of uttering threats
  • Probation for 12 months with the sole condition that the appellant have no contact, directly or indirectly, with Christopher Laing