R. v. J.J.P.

R. v. J.J.P.

The Court held the sentencing judge did not err in law: he correctly applied the dangerous offender test (intractability refers to conduct), the weight afforded the psychiatrist's opinion was a factual credibility assessment not reviewable by Crown on law grounds, and reliance on the offender's unsworn dock statement as evidence of remorse was permissible; the long-term offender finding and 16-year determinate sentence were upheld except that a mathematical error in pre-sentence custody credit must be corrected (additional 551 days credited).

Citation
2020 YKCA 13
Parties
Crown; Appellant in Docket 18 Yu828; Respondent in Docket 18 YU829: Regina; Respondent in Docket 18 Yu828; Appellant in Docket 18 YU829: J.J.P.
Court
Yukon Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Concerning Dangerous Offender and Long Term Offender Designation and Sentence / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeals From Supreme Court of Yukon Sentencing and Designation Orders
Outcome
Crown appeal dismissed; J.J.P. appeal allowed in part solely to correct pre-sentence custody credit (additional 551 days); long-term offender designation, 10-year supervision order and 16-year determinate sentence otherwise upheld.
Legal Topics
Designation Threshold, Standard of Proof, Expert Psychiatric Evidence, Remorse/dock Statement, Totality Principle, Pre Sentence Custody Credit, Publication Ban, SOIRA Confidentiality
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Sex Offences Dangerous Offender Regime Long Term Offender Regime Evidence Law Designation Threshold Standard of Proof +6 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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown; Appellant in Docket 18 Yu828; Respondent in Docket 18 YU829

J.J.P.

Respondent in Docket 18 Yu828; Appellant in Docket 18 YU829

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Concerning Dangerous Offender and Long Term Offender Designation and Sentence / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeals From Supreme Court of Yukon Sentencing and Designation Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether judge erred by requiring proof of 'untreatable' or 'therapeutic hopelessness' for dangerous offender designation
  2. 2 Whether judge erred in attributing weight to hearsay-based psychiatric opinion
  3. 3 Whether judge improperly relied on offender's dock statement as evidence of remorse

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held the sentencing judge did not err in law: he correctly applied the dangerous offender test (intractability refers to conduct), the weight afforded the psychiatrist's opinion was a factual credibility assessment not reviewable by Crown on law grounds, and reliance on the offender's unsworn dock statement as evidence of remorse was permissible; the long-term offender finding and 16-year determinate sentence were upheld except that a mathematical error in pre-sentence custody credit must be corrected (additional 551 days credited).

Court Disposition

Crown appeal dismissed; J.J.P. appeal allowed in part solely to correct pre-sentence custody credit (additional 551 days); long-term offender designation, 10-year supervision order and 16-year determinate sentence otherwise upheld.

Orders

  • Dismiss Crown's appeal.
  • Allow J.J.P.'s appeal in part and correct pre-sentence custody credit to 1,850 days (actual days served 1,233 days at 1.5:1 credit), resulting in an additional 551 days credited.