R. v. B., T.
The application judge made the required legislated determinations, relied on expert risk assessment and the applicant's history and conduct to find the appellant constituted a danger to the public, and accordingly properly refused transfer to Youth Court; the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed that...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C42547
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: B., T. (A Young Person)
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 18 January 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Youth Justice Appeal / Appeal From Ontario Court of Justice Order Refusing Transfer to Youth Court Under S.16(9) of the Young Offenders Act
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; order refusing transfer to Youth Court affirmed.
- Legal Topics
- Transfer to Youth Court, Danger to the Public, Risk Assessment, Application of Young Offenders Act S.16(9)
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
B., T. (A Young Person)
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Youth Justice Appeal / Appeal From Ontario Court of Justice Order Refusing Transfer to Youth Court Under S.16(9) of the Young Offenders Act
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application judge erred in refusing transfer to Youth Court under s.16(9) of the Young Offenders Act
- 2 Whether the appellant constitutes a danger to the public warranting denial of transfer
- 3 Whether the principle of protection of the public should be narrowly construed
Ratio Decidendi
The application judge made the required legislated determinations, relied on expert risk assessment and the applicant's history and conduct to find the appellant constituted a danger to the public, and accordingly properly refused transfer to Youth Court; the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed that factual evaluation and statutory application.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; order refusing transfer to Youth Court affirmed.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Order of Justice Douglas B. Maund dated February 27, 2004 refusing transfer to Youth Court pursuant to s.16(9) of the Young Offenders Act is affirmed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. B., T. Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2006-01-18 Docket numbers C42547 Judges Laskin, John Ivan; Gillese, Eileen E.; MacFarland, Jean Louise Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20060118 DOCKET: C42547 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) – and – B., T. (A Young Person) (Appellant) BEFORE: LASKIN, GILLESE and MACFARLAND JJ.A. COUNSEL: P. Andras Schreck and Jennifer Trehearne for the appellant Shelly Hallett for the respondent HEARD & RELEASED ORALLY: December 16, 2005 On appeal from the order of Justice Douglas B. Maund of the Ontario Court of Justice, refusing transfer to Youth Court pursuant to s. 16(9) of the Young Offenders Act, dated February 27, 2004. ENDORSEMENT [1] The application judge carefully considered all the evidence and made each of the legislated determinations before concluding as follows: I do not agree that the principle of protection of the public, or danger to the public, should be narrowly construed. T.B. was assessed by Dr. Klassen as a low risk for serious violence but with a higher violence risk in certain circumstances. She is also generally at a high risk to commit other criminal acts. Given her involvement in this serious offence, her conduct and personal history, as well as her assessed risk potential, I have concluded that T.B. does constitute a danger to the public…. [2] We share the application judge’s evaluation of the merits of the application. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. “John Laskin J.A.” “E. E. Gillese J.A.” “J. MacFarland J.A.”