R. v. C.J.

R. v. C.J.

The Court dismissed the appeal because the conviction for voyeurism was not unreasonable on the record and the trial judge imposed a fit sentence after considering mitigating factors and pandemic-related issues, so there was no basis for appellate interference.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2022 ONCA 252
Parties
Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: C.J.
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal — Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Voyeurism, Sentencing, Criminal Appeal, Publication Restriction
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Voyeurism Sentencing Criminal Appeal Publication Restriction

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

C.J.

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Appeal — Conviction and Sentence

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for voyeurism was unreasonable
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed was fit and liable to appellate interference

Ratio Decidendi

The Court dismissed the appeal because the conviction for voyeurism was not unreasonable on the record and the trial judge imposed a fit sentence after considering mitigating factors and pandemic-related issues, so there was no basis for appellate interference.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.
  • An order restricting publication under ss.486.4 and 486.6 of the Criminal Code shall continue.