R. v. Curto
Leave to appeal sentence was granted but the appeal was dismissed because the s. 719(3.1) issue was not clearly raised below, there was no record on the impact of pre-sentence custody, the parole impact was attenuated, and in any event the sentence was fit given the seriousness of the assault; even assuming an error...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2012 ONCA 574
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Lawrence Curto
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 6 September 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Sentence to Court of Appeal
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal sentence granted; appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Sentence Appeal, Pre Sentence Custody Credit, Thin Skull Rule, Parole Eligibility
- 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
Lawrence Curto
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Sentence to Court of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Interpretation and application of s. 719(3.1) of the Criminal Code
- 2 Adequacy and fitness of sentence on assault charges
- 3 Impact of pre-sentence custody on parole eligibility
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal sentence was granted but the appeal was dismissed because the s. 719(3.1) issue was not clearly raised below, there was no record on the impact of pre-sentence custody, the parole impact was attenuated, and in any event the sentence was fit given the seriousness of the assault; even assuming an error on the thin-skull point the sentence would remain appropriate.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal sentence granted; appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Leave to appeal sentence granted
- Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Curto Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2012-09-06 Neutral citation 2012 ONCA 574 Docket numbers C55219 Judges Rosenberg, Marc; Blair, Robert Ashley; Rouleau, Paul S. Subject Criminal Decision Content COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: R. v. Curto, 2012 ONCA 574 DATE: 20120905 DOCKET: C55219 Rosenberg, Blair and Rouleau JJ.A. BETWEEN Her Majesty the Queen Respondent and Lawrence Curto Appellant Neil R. Jones and Crystal E. Tomusiak, for the appellant Eliott Behar, for the respondent Heard: September 5, 2012 On appeal from the sentence imposed on February 1, 2012 by Justice P.H. Marjoh Agro of the Ontario Court of Justice, sitting without a jury. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] While Mr. Jones has raised some important issues regarding s. 719(3.1) we do not think this is a proper case to deal with those issues, for the following reasons: 1. The issue was not clearly raised before the trial judge. 2. There was, accordingly, no information about the impact of the pre-sentence custody on this appellant; and 3. The impact of the delay on the appellant’s parole eligibility is attenuated in this case as the appellant is to be released on parole today. [2] As to the thin-skulled issue, assuming without deciding this was an error, given the seriousness of the assault, we think the sentence was entirely fit. The severity of the injuries was a proper factor to consider. [3] Accordingly, while leave to appeal sentence is granted the appeal is dismissed.