R. v. Lawrence
The appeal was dismissed because the sentence was within the range for similar offences and the sentencing judge gave cogent reasons why, despite the appellant's youth and lack of record, denunciation of a planned, well-developed theft scheme masterminded by the appellant and involving multiple offences and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2008 ONCA 41
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Wyman Lawrence
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 23 January 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Sentence
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal sentence granted; appeal dismissed; sentence upheld.
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Conditional Sentence, Denunciation, Theft, Leadership of Criminal Enterprise
- 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
Wyman Lawrence
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence was within the appropriate range and free of error in principle
- 2 Whether the sentencing judge failed to explain why a conditional sentence was not warranted
- 3 Whether denunciation required a period of imprisonment given the facts
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the sentence was within the range for similar offences and the sentencing judge gave cogent reasons why, despite the appellant's youth and lack of record, denunciation of a planned, well-developed theft scheme masterminded by the appellant and involving multiple offences and approximately $65,000 in unrecovered property required a term of imprisonment.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal sentence granted; appeal dismissed; sentence upheld.
Orders
- Leave to appeal sentence granted
- Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Lawrence Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2008-01-23 Neutral citation 2008 ONCA 41 Docket numbers C47423 Judges Doherty, David H.; Gillese, Eileen E.; Epstein, Gloria Jean Subject Criminal Decision Content CITATION: R. v. Lawrence, 2008 ONCA 41 DATE: 20080121 DOCKET: C47423 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO DOHERTY, GILLESE and EPSTEIN JJ.A. BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent and WYMAN LAWRENCE Appellant John Mann for the appellant Michelle Campbell for the respondent Heard: January 18, 2008 On appeal from the sentence entered by Justice George J. Brophy of the Ontario Court of Justice dated June 27, 2007. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] We see no basis on which to interfere with the sentence. It is within the range for similar offences and reveals no error in principle. While counsel for the appellant argues that the sentencing judge failed to explain why a conditional sentence was not warranted, we reject this submission. The sentencing judge gave cogent reasons for why, despite the appellant’s relative youth and absence of a criminal record, this was one of those rare instances in which denunciation mandated a period of imprisonment. Those reasons included that Mr. Lawrence pled guilty to 9 separate counts involving thefts which took place over a period of months. He was the leader of a scheme in which he persuaded a number of younger people to engage in the theft of motor boats, construction equipment and other items from different yards and places. The ring was to steal the equipment and deliver it to the appellant, who would then have the equipment trucked to Newfoundland. This was a planned and well-developed scheme of which the appellant was the mastermind. The majority of the stolen items, which totalled a value of approximately $65,000, was never recovered. [2] The appellant’s conduct while on bail pending appeal is a matter for the correctional authorities. It does not go to the fitness of sentence, in these circumstances. [3] Accordingly, leave to appeal sentence is granted and the appeal is dismissed.