R. v. D., J.
The Youth Court judge erred in principle by placing undue weight on general deterrence, producing a manifestly excessive custodial disposition for a first-time young offender; the appropriate disposition is reduced to 2 months secure custody followed by 2 years probation (majority), and the appeal is allowed to vary...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C31502
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: J.D. (a young person)
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 12 July 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal (youth) / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Youth Court Order of Disposition
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; disposition varied to 2 months secure custody followed by 2 years probation on the terms set by the Youth Court judge.
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Deterrence, Custody, Probation
- 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
J.D. (a young person)
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal (youth) / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Youth Court Order of Disposition
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Youth Court judge erred in principle by imposing 8 months secure custody followed by 2 years probation
- 2 Whether the Youth Court judge overemphasized general deterrence in youth sentencing
- 3 Whether fresh evidence concerning the appellant's educational prospects required a different disposition
Ratio Decidendi
The Youth Court judge erred in principle by placing undue weight on general deterrence, producing a manifestly excessive custodial disposition for a first-time young offender; the appropriate disposition is reduced to 2 months secure custody followed by 2 years probation (majority), and the appeal is allowed to vary the sentence accordingly.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; disposition varied to 2 months secure custody followed by 2 years probation on the terms set by the Youth Court judge.
Orders
- Leave granted; appeal allowed; disposition varied to 2 months secure custody to be followed by 2 years probation on the terms set by the Youth Court judge.
- Dissent (Weiler J.A.): would allow the appeal and reduce custody to 6 months and set aside the probation order
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. D., J. Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 1999-07-12 Docket numbers C31502 Judges Osborne, Coulter Arthur Anthony; Weiler, Karen Merle Magnuson; Feldman, Kathryn N. Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 19990712 DOCKET: C31502 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) v. J.D. (a young person) (Appellant) BEFORE: OSBORNE A.C.J.O., WEILER and FELDMAN JJ.A. COUNSEL: James C. Fleming for the appellant Christine Tier for the respondent HEARD: July 5, 1999 On appeal from the order of disposition of His Honour Judge Cooper dated January 29, 1999. ENDORSEMENT [1] In our view, in the somewhat unusual circumstances of this case, we think that the Youth Court judge erred in principle in requiring the appellant to serve a disposition of 8 months secure custody to be followed by 2 years probation. [2] The appellant is a young offender who has no criminal or youth court record. It is accepted that he acted out of character at the time of a somewhat vicious assault and the Youth Court judge found that specific deterrence was not an operative factor. [3] In the circumstances, we are all of the view that the Youth Court judge placed too great an emphasis on the general deterrence. Although this was a serious assault which began with what appears to be a consensual fight and, although we agree with the Youth Court judge that a custodial sentence was required, we do not think that a disposition of 8 months secure custody represents a fit disposition. In reaching this conclusion, we have taken into account, among other things, the fresh evidence as it relates to the appellant’s somewhat immediate educational prospects. [4] The majority of the court is of the view that the disposition should be reduced to 2 months to be followed by 2 years probation on the terms set out by the Youth Court judge. Weiler J.A., having regard to the severity of the assault and its continuation once the victim was helpless, would allow the appeal and reduce the sentence to 6 months. She would set aside the probation order. [5] In the result, leave is granted, the appeal is allowed, the disposition is varied to 2 months secure custody to be followed by 2 years probation on the terms set by the Youth Court judge.