R. v. Akingbesote
Majority held the 18-month sentence was not demonstrably unfit in light of the sophisticated fraud, the appellant's probationary status, prior dishonesty convictions and lack of remorse; the appeal was dismissed. A dissenting judge would have reduced the sentence to 12 months based on recent decisions.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C37308
- Parties
- Appellant: Olubayode Akingbesote a.k.a. Joseph Alao; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 11 April 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Sentence (court of Appeal)
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal sentence granted; appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Fraud, Probation, Aggravating Factors, Remorse, Fitness of Sentence
- 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
Olubayode Akingbesote a.k.a. Joseph Alao
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Sentence (court of Appeal)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 18-month sentence is demonstrably unfit
- 2 Appropriate sentence for a sophisticated fraud committed while on probation
- 3 Weight to be given to prior convictions and lack of remorse
Ratio Decidendi
Majority held the 18-month sentence was not demonstrably unfit in light of the sophisticated fraud, the appellant's probationary status, prior dishonesty convictions and lack of remorse; the appeal was dismissed. A dissenting judge would have reduced the sentence to 12 months based on recent decisions.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal sentence granted; appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Leave to appeal sentence granted.
- Appeal dismissed and sentence of 18 months upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Akingbesote Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2002-04-11 Docket numbers C37308 Judges Laskin, John Ivan; Charron, Louise Vivianne; Armstrong, Robert Patrick Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20020411 DOCKET: C37308 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) v. OLUBAYODE AKINGBESOTE a.k.a. JOSEPH ALAO (Appellant) BEFORE: LASKIN, CHARRON & ARMSTRONG JJ.A. COUNSEL: Howard C. Rubel for the appellant Roger Shallow for the respondent HEARD: April 8, 2002 On appeal from sentence imposed by Ted Matlow J. on October 26, 2001. ENDORSEMENT Released Orally: April 8, 2002 [1] The appellant appeals his sentence of 18 months on top of one and one-half months of pre-trial custody. He asks for a sentence of 12 months. [2] This was a sophisticated fraud committed while the appellant was on probation for another crime of dishonesty, uttering a forged document. The appellant also has a record for another fraud and he has shown no remorse for his crimes. In the light of these aggravating circumstances the majority of the court would uphold the sentence imposed by the trial judge. In their view it is not demonstrably unfit. [3] Laskin J.A. would reduce the sentence to 12 months despite these aggravating factors. In his view, the sentence imposed by the trial judge was unfit, having regard to the recent sentencing decisions of this court. [4] Accordingly, leave to appeal sentence is granted but the appeal is dismissed.