R. v. Duguay
The trial judge did not err in rejecting the joint submission because the offences were serious child-exploitation offences and the sentence, which emphasized denunciation and deterrence in a measured way, was within acceptable bounds; therefore the appeal is dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2009 ONCA 23
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty The Queen; Appellant: Line Duguay
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 12 January 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Sentence
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal granted.
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Appeal, Child Sexual Exploitation, Joint Submission Rejection, Denunciation and Deterrence
- 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
Line Duguay
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge erred in rejecting the joint submission
- 2 Whether the imposed sentence was appropriate given exploitation of young teenage girls
- 3 Whether greater weight to denunciation and deterrence was justified
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge did not err in rejecting the joint submission because the offences were serious child-exploitation offences and the sentence, which emphasized denunciation and deterrence in a measured way, was within acceptable bounds; therefore the appeal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal granted.
Orders
- Leave to appeal granted.
- Appeal dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Duguay Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2009-01-12 Neutral citation 2009 ONCA 23 Docket numbers C49473 Judges Moldaver, Michael James; Borins, Stephen; Blair, Robert Ashley Subject Criminal Decision Content CITATION: R. v. Duguay, 2009 ONCA 23 DATE: 20090112 DOCKET: C49473 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO Moldaver, Borins and Blair JJ.A. BETWEEN: Her Majesty The Queen Respondent and Line Duguay Appellant Eric D. McCooeye, for the appellant Gail Glickman, for the respondent Heard and endorsed: January 8, 2009 On appeal from sentence imposed by Justice Frank R. Caputo of the Superior Court of Justice dated September 12, 2008. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] We are not persuaded that the trial judge erred in rejecting the joint submission and imposing the sentence he did. The offences were serious. They involved the exploitation of young teenage girls and we agree with the Alberta Court of Appeal in R. v. Tang [1997] A.J. No. 460 that “capitalizing on the sale of children’s sexual services is no less reprehensible than other forms of serious child abuse”. The sentence imposed by the trial judge gave greater weight to the principles of denunciation and deterrence in a considered and measured fashion. [2] Accordingly, while leave to appeal is granted, the appeal is dismissed.