R. v. Fletcher-Jarvis
The Court of Appeal upheld the sentence as fit and within the appropriate range, giving deference to the trial judge's balancing of denunciation, deterrence and rehabilitation in light of the offence gravity and the appellant's criminal record and mitigation; the appeal against sentence was dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C42962
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Carliss Victoria Fletcher-Jarvis
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 28 January 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Sentence Appeal / Appeal From Sentence Imposed July 21, 2004 by Ontario Court of Justice (kastner J.)
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted; appeal against sentence dismissed; sentence upheld.
- Legal Topics
- Aggravated Assault, Sentencing Principles, Remorse, Rehabilitation, Deterrence, Denunciation
- 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
Carliss Victoria Fletcher-Jarvis
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Appeal From Sentence Imposed July 21, 2004 by Ontario Court of Justice (kastner J.)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence was demonstrably unfit or excessive
- 2 Whether the trial judge properly balanced denunciation, general and specific deterrence with mitigation (remorse and rehabilitation)
- 3 Whether a reformatory sentence with probation was appropriate given the offence gravity and appellant's record of violence
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal upheld the sentence as fit and within the appropriate range, giving deference to the trial judge's balancing of denunciation, deterrence and rehabilitation in light of the offence gravity and the appellant's criminal record and mitigation; the appeal against sentence was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted; appeal against sentence dismissed; sentence upheld.
Orders
- Grant leave to appeal
- Dismiss the appeal against sentence (sentence upheld)
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Fletcher-Jarvis Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2005-01-28 Docket numbers C42962 Judges Moldaver, Michael James; Blair, Robert Ashley; LaForme, Harry Smith Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20050128 DOCKET: C42962 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) – and – CARLISS VICTORIA FLETCHER-JARVIS (Appellant) BEFORE: MOLDAVER, BLAIR and LaFORME JJ.A. COUNSEL: Mangesh Duggal for the appellant Susan Ficek for the respondent HEARD & ENDORSED: January 28, 2005 On appeal from sentence imposed by Justice Nancy S. Kastner of the Ontario Court of Justice dated July 21, 2004. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] We are not persuaded that the sentence imposed by the trial judge exceeded the range suggested by Crown counsel. In any event, having regard to the gravity and seriousness of the crime (aggravated assault) and the appellant’s lengthy record for crimes of violence, we are satisfied that the sentence imposed by the trial judge was fit. In so concluding, we note that the trial judge quite properly observed that the case could well have attracted a penitentiary sentence. However, having regard to the appellant’s remorse and most importantly, the efforts she has made to rid herself of her drug and alcohol problems, the trial judge determined that a reformatory sentence with three years probation would recognize those efforts without sacrificing the overriding principles of denunciation and general and specific deterrence. [2] In all of the circumstances, we think that the sentence imposed was fair and balanced and if anything, at the low end of the range. [3] Like the trial judge, we too are hopeful that the appellant will take the steps needed to overcome her drug abuse problems and that she will go on to become a responsible member of society. While we have taken her efforts into account, they do not alter our belief that the sentence under review is fit. [4] Accordingly, while we would grant leave to appeal, we would dismiss the appeal against sentence.