R. v. Berry
The trial judge gave careful reasons and did not err in principle; the appellant's extensive and related criminal record, classification as a career criminal and absence of mitigation justified a sentence somewhat beyond the usual range; the gap in the record did not render the sentence unfit; consequently the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2012 ONCA 621
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Raymond George Berry
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 20 September 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Sentence Imposed by Superior Court of Justice
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Drug Trafficking, Career Criminal, Sentencing Parity, Appellate Review – Manifestly Unreasonable
- 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
Raymond George Berry
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Sentence Imposed by Superior Court of Justice
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge erred in principle
- 2 Whether the sentence was beyond the settled range and manifestly unreasonable
- 3 Whether a gap in the appellant's record mitigated the sentence
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge gave careful reasons and did not err in principle; the appellant's extensive and related criminal record, classification as a career criminal and absence of mitigation justified a sentence somewhat beyond the usual range; the gap in the record did not render the sentence unfit; consequently the sentence was not manifestly unreasonable and the appeal was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Sentence upheld
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Berry Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2012-09-20 Neutral citation 2012 ONCA 621 Docket numbers C54458 Judges Doherty, David H.; Hoy, Alexandra; Pepall, Sarah E. Subject Criminal Decision Content COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: R. v. Berry, 2012 ONCA 621 DATE: 20120919 DOCKET: C54458 Doherty, Hoy and Pepall JJ.A. BETWEEN Her Majesty the Queen Respondent and Raymond George Berry Appellant Jonathan Dawe, for the appellant Iona Jaffe, for the respondent Heard: September 18, 2012 On appeal from the sentence imposed on August 3, 2011 by Justice E.J. Koke of the Superior Court of Justice. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] The trial judge gave careful reasons. We see no error in principle. [2] The appellant’s extensive criminal record, including five previous convictions for the same offences and the circumstances of this offence, demonstrate that the appellant was in the business of drug trafficking and had been so on a regular basis throughout his adult life. The trial judge did not err in referring to him as a career criminal. [3] There was a significant gap in the appellant’s record for drug trafficking. No doubt, the trial judge was aware of it. That “gap”, however, was not such as to render this sentence unfit having regard to the other factors. [4] We do not agree that the trial judge erred in imposing a sentence beyond the settled range. Ranges exist to promote parity. Parity is premised on treating “like” offenders in a comparable manner. To the extent that the circumstances distinguish an offender, be they mitigating or aggravating from the typical offence, ranges will have less significance. Sentencing is an individualized process. The appellant’s extensive and related criminal record and the total absence of anything by way of mitigation drove this sentence somewhat beyond the usual range. We cannot say that the sentence is manifestly unreasonable. [5] The appeal is dismissed.