R. v. L.E.B.

R. v. L.E.B.

The court found beyond a reasonable doubt that the offender met the risk criteria but, applying the Payne/Neve framework and weighing expert evidence, concluded there was a reasonable possibility of eventual control of risk in the community through external controls (notably pharmacological sex-drive reduction, high intensity supervision and life structuring) as described by the defence expert; accordingly the Crown did not prove the requisite likelihood of future harm under s.753(1) and the offender was declared a long-term offender under s.753.1 rather than a dangerous offender, imposed determinate custodial sentences and a ten-year long-term supervision order with mandated...

Citation
2002 NSSC 156
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: L. E. B.
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal — Dangerous Offender / Long Term Offender Application / Sentencing / Dangerous Offender Application Hearing
Outcome
Accused declared a long-term offender (s.753.1); not declared a dangerous offender (s.753). Determinate sentences imposed and long-term supervision order for ten years ordered.
Legal Topics
Dangerous Offender Finding, Long Term Offender / Long Term Supervision, Risk Assessment and Psychopathy (pcl R), Treatability and External Controls, Chemical Castration (luprolide Acetate), Delayed Parole Order, Weapons Prohibition, DNA Sampling
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Dangerous Offender Law Sexual Offences Corrections and Conditional Release Dangerous Offender Finding Long Term Offender / Long Term Supervision Risk Assessment and Psychopathy (pcl R) +5 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 8 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

L. E. B.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal — Dangerous Offender / Long Term Offender Application / Sentencing / Dangerous Offender Application Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the offender is a dangerous offender under s.753(1)(a)(i) or s.753(1)(b) of the Criminal Code
  2. 2 Whether the offender should instead be declared a long-term offender under s.753.1(1)
  3. 3 Assessing pattern of repetitive violent/sexual behaviour and its intractability

Ratio Decidendi

The court found beyond a reasonable doubt that the offender met the risk criteria but, applying the Payne/Neve framework and weighing expert evidence, concluded there was a reasonable possibility of eventual control of risk in the community through external controls (notably pharmacological sex-drive reduction, high intensity supervision and life structuring) as described by the defence expert; accordingly the Crown did not prove the requisite likelihood of future harm under s.753(1) and the offender was declared a long-term offender under s.753.1 rather than a dangerous offender, imposed determinate custodial sentences and a ten-year long-term supervision order with mandated...

Court Disposition

Accused declared a long-term offender (s.753.1); not declared a dangerous offender (s.753). Determinate sentences imposed and long-term supervision order for ten years ordered.

Orders

  • Imposed determinate sentence of eight years imprisonment for offences under s.271(1)(a) and s.88 to be served concurrently in a federal institution
  • Imposed determinate sentence of four years imprisonment for offence under s.264.1(1)(a) to be served concurrently with other sentences