R. v. Jacobson
The sentencing judge erred in principle by categorizing the breach as among the most serious; criminal history must be considered but does not automatically justify the maximum sentence for every breach under s.810; the appropriate disposition is to vary the sentence to 12 months custody plus 6 months time served...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C44108
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Walter Garry Jacobson
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 21 April 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Sentence (court of Appeal)
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed in part; sentence varied.
- Legal Topics
- Breach of Recognizance, Section 810 Criminal Code, Sentence Variation
- 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
Walter Garry Jacobson
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Sentence (court of Appeal)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in principle by categorizing the breach as among the most serious possible breaches of recognizance
- 2 Whether the offender's criminal history must be taken into account when assessing seriousness under s.810 Criminal Code
- 3 What is an appropriate sentence for this offender and offence
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge erred in principle by categorizing the breach as among the most serious; criminal history must be considered but does not automatically justify the maximum sentence for every breach under s.810; the appropriate disposition is to vary the sentence to 12 months custody plus 6 months time served (total 18 months) and retain the probation terms.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed in part; sentence varied.
Orders
- Leave to appeal sentence granted
- Original period of incarceration imposed by the sentencing judge is set aside
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Jacobson Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2006-04-21 Docket numbers C44108 Judges Simmons, Janet M.; Cronk, Eleanore Ann; Lang, Susan Elizabeth Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20060421 DOCKET: C44108 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) – and – WALTER GARRY JACOBSON (Applicant/Appellant) BEFORE: SIMMONS, CRONK AND LANG JJ.A. COUNSEL: Maureen McGuire for the appellant Tracy Stapleton for the respondent HEARD & ENDORSED: April 13, 2006 On appeal from the sentence imposed by Justice Bernard M. Kelly of the Ontario Court of Justice on June 7, 2005. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] We agree that the sentencing judge erred in principle when he concluded that the conduct in issue in this case was in the category of the most serious of possible breaches of the appellant’s recognizance. We accept the Crown’s submission that in assessing the seriousness of a breach of recognizance under s. 810 of the Criminal Code the criminal history of the offender must be taken into account. However, we also accept the appellant’s counsel’s submission that not every breach of a recognizance under s. 810 of the Criminal Code mandates the maximum available sentence. [2] In our view an appropriate sentence for this offence and this offender is 18 months imprisonment, together with the period of probation imposed by the sentencing judge. [3] Accordingly, leave to appeal sentence is granted, the period of incarceration imposed by the sentencing judge is set aside and a sentence of 12 months imprisonment, in addition to 6 months time served, is imposed. All other terms of the sentence imposed by the sentencing judge shall remain the same.