R. v. A.B.

R. v. A.B.

Applying Friesen and Bertrand Marchand, the offender's position of trust, significant age gap, multiple communications, and material impact on the victim made a custodial sentence required; the judge found a fit sentence of 12 months custody and two years probation, ancillary DNA and SOIRA orders and a $200 victim surcharge, and therefore declined to adjudicate the s.12 Charter challenge because the imposed sentence exceeds the statutory six month minimum.

Citation
2024 NSPC 9
Parties
Crown: His Majesty the King; Defendant: A.B.; Complainant/witness: C.D.
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing/decision
Outcome
Guilty plea accepted; Sentence imposed
Legal Topics
Mandatory Minimum Sentence, Making Sexually Explicit Material Available to Person Under 16, S.171.1(1)(b), S.171.1(2)(a) Constitutionality, Grooming, Luring, Victim Impact, SOIRA Orders, DNA Orders, Victim Surcharge
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Sentencing Sexual Offences Child Protection Mandatory Minimum Sentence Making Sexually Explicit Material Available to Person Under 16 S.171.1(1)(b) +7 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 33 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

His Majesty the King

Crown

A.B.

Defendant

C.D.

Complainant/witness

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing/decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.171.1(2)(a) mandatory minimum six months imprisonment violates s.12(d) of the Charter for this offender or reasonably foreseeable offenders
  2. 2 What is a fit and proportionate sentence for making sexually explicit material available to a person under 16 contrary to s.171.1(1)(b)
  3. 3 Whether grooming was established as an aggravating factor

Ratio Decidendi

Applying Friesen and Bertrand Marchand, the offender's position of trust, significant age gap, multiple communications, and material impact on the victim made a custodial sentence required; the judge found a fit sentence of 12 months custody and two years probation, ancillary DNA and SOIRA orders and a $200 victim surcharge, and therefore declined to adjudicate the s.12 Charter challenge because the imposed sentence exceeds the statutory six month minimum.

Court Disposition

Guilty plea accepted; Sentence imposed

Orders

  • 12 months custody (period of imprisonment)
  • Two years probation with conditions: report to probation officer within three days of release and as directed; undergo and complete psychiatric/psychological/mental health counselling as directed; no contact or communication with C.D.; sign consents to permit probation service to monitor participation in...