R. v. Le
Although the sentencing judge erred in criticizing the police sting contrary to R. v. Kirzner, that error did not undermine his careful consideration of aggravating and mitigating factors and did not render the imposed 18-month sentences manifestly unfit; therefore the appeals were dismissed and the sentences affirmed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2009 ONCA 140
- Parties
- Appellant: Her Majesty the Queen; Respondent: Quang Huy Le (a.k.a. Henry Le); Respondent: Anh Ba Huy Nguyen (a.k.a. Andrew Nguyen)
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 13 February 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Sentence
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Police Sting Operations, Appellate Review Manifestly Unfit
- 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
Appellant
Quang Huy Le (a.k.a. Henry Le)
Respondent
Anh Ba Huy Nguyen (a.k.a. Andrew Nguyen)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred by criticizing police sting operations contrary to R. v. Kirzner
- 2 Whether the 18-month sentences were manifestly unfit such that appellate intervention was required
Ratio Decidendi
Although the sentencing judge erred in criticizing the police sting contrary to R. v. Kirzner, that error did not undermine his careful consideration of aggravating and mitigating factors and did not render the imposed 18-month sentences manifestly unfit; therefore the appeals were dismissed and the sentences affirmed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Sentences of 18 months imprisonment for each respondent are affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Le Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2009-02-13 Neutral citation 2009 ONCA 140 Docket numbers C48771 Judges Feldman, Kathryn N.; MacPherson, James C.; Armstrong, Robert Patrick Subject Criminal Decision Content CITATION: R. v. Le, 2009 ONCA 140 DATE: 20090213 DOCKET: C48771 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO Feldman, MacPherson and Armstrong JJ.A. BETWEEN: Her Majesty the Queen Appellant and Quang Huy Le (a.k.a. Henry Le) and Anh Ba Huy Nguyen (a.k.a. Andrew Nguyen) Respondents Steve Coroza and Jennifer Campitelli, for the appellant Quang Huy Le, appearing in person Anh Ba Huy Nguyen, appearing in person Heard and released orally: February 12, 2009 On appeal from the sentence imposed on April 29, 2008, by Justice Peter Harris of the Ontario Court of Justice. ENDORSEMENT [1] The Crown appeals the 18 month sentences imposed on both respondents for money laundering offences. [2] Although we agree with the Crown that the sentencing judge erred by criticizing the police sting aspect of this case, contrary to the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Kirzner (1978), 38 C.C.C. (2d) 131 at p. 137, we do not think that error detracts from his careful review of the aggravating and mitigating factors. We think that the trial judge’s review of these factors does not make the sentence he imposed manifestly unfit. [3] The appeal is dismissed. “K. Feldman J.A.” “J.C. MacPherson J.A.” “Robert P. Armstrong J.A.”