Canada Case Law

R. v. Katz

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The appeal is dismissed because the sentencing judge's factual findings that the offences were extremely aggravating and that a penitentiary term was required were open to him; there was no error in rejecting a conditional sentence or in assessing mitigation and credits; the 2-year sentence is not demonstrably unfit; however the driving prohibition as imposed was legally incorrect and is replaced with a three-year prohibition commencing on the date of sentencing.

Source excerpt

• Conditional sentence
• Pre-sentence custody credit
• Denunciation and deterrence
• Driving prohibition start date
• Intoxication and responsibility
• Use of weapon against police

Read case analysis

R. v. Houle

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Detention review under s. 525 of the Criminal Code. The Court upheld Mr. Houle’s continued detention on the secondary ground and directed efforts to seek an earlier trial date.

• Detention review
• Secondary ground for detention (public safety)
• Electronic monitoring
• Flight from police
• Dangerous driving
• Possession of stolen property

Read case analysis

R. v. Pike

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Identification for Wentworth events was established beyond a reasonable doubt by credible, consistent, contemporaneous eyewitness and police evidence (Constable Gallen and civilians) and the sequence of events left no reasonable alternative explanation, so elements of counts 1-6 and counts 9-11 were proved; identification for New Annan counts rested on stranger identification by Mr. Miller and insufficient circumstantial corroboration, leaving reasonable doubt on counts 7 and 8 and requiring acquittal on those counts.

Source excerpt

• Identification evidence
• Standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt
• Aggravated assault endangering life
• Theft of police vehicle
• Resisting arrest
• Dangerous operation of a conveyance

Read case analysis

R. v. Heth-Klems

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

On sentence for dangerous driving causing death, the court imposed 12 months’ imprisonment, a three-year driving prohibition and no DNA order.

• Dangerous driving causing death
• Conditional sentence order (cso) availability
• Driving prohibition
• Dna databank order
• General deterrence and denunciation
• Dangerous-driving-causing-death

Read case analysis

R. v. Gomes

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court held that the trial judge's factual findings (based on admissions, expert testimony, eyewitness evidence, SDM data and scene photos) were open on the evidence and supported a finding of legal causation that the appellant's impaired driving caused bodily harm; the verdict was reasonable and the sentencing judge did not err in weighing denunciation and deterrence over mitigation and in considering but not being swayed by collateral immigration consequences; appeal and sentence appeal dismissed (leave to appeal sentence granted but appeal dismissed).

Source excerpt

• Impaired driving
• Causation
• Evidentiary sufficiency
• Sentencing mitigation
• Immigration consequences

Read case analysis

R. v. Labbee

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Ms. Labbee was sentenced to two years less a day and two years’ probation for leaving the scene of an accident causing death, with ancillary orders.

• Hit and run
• Failure to stop and render assistance
• Forgery
• Obstructionist behaviour
• Conditional sentence
• Ancillary orders

Read case analysis

R. v. Flowers

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The trial judge properly concluded identification was reliable based on the primary officer's recognition combined with strong confirmatory evidence from two other officers and the appellant's flight conduct; the driving met the Beatty standard of a marked departure; factual findings were reasonable and entitled to deference; therefore the convictions were upheld and the appeal dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Identification evidence
• Dangerous operation of a motor vehicle
• Driving while disqualified
• Possession of stolen property

Read case analysis

R. v. Smith

Court

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

The appeal is dismissed because the sentencing judge did not commit an error in principle: the reference to attempting to burn the car was a reasonable inference from the Agreed Statement of Facts and, in any event, did not impact the sentence; the global four‑year sentence was not demonstrably unfit and was properly adjusted under the principle of totality.

Source excerpt

• Failure to stop and offer assistance
• Driving while disqualified
• Attempting to obstruct the course of justice
• Sentencing principles
• Totality principle
• Aggravating factors

Read case analysis

R. v. Laliberte

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Sentencing reasons for Serina-Marie Anne Laliberte after convictions for over .08 causing death and bodily harm, with 25 months' imprisonment and a five-year driving ban.

• Over .08 driving causing death
• Over .08 driving causing bodily harm
• Sentencing range (r. v. suter)
• Moral blameworthiness
• Denunciation and deterrence
• Gladue factors

Read case analysis

R. v. Desmond

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

A head sentence of two years and four months (28 months) was proportionate on these facts given the serious and lifelong harm to the victim, the offender's mitigating factors (early guilty plea, substance program completion, remorse, pro-social history), and the Crown's inability to prove impairment; remand credit of 852 days equals the sentence so custody is served; Crown failed to meet burden for a discretionary DNA order for a secondary designated offence; forfeiture of the offender's sole asset would be disproportionate and is refused; a four-year driving prohibition is imposed to satisfy…

Source excerpt

• Criminal negligence causing bodily harm
• Sentencing principles
• Ancillary orders
• Cultural background in sentencing
• Remand credit
• Driving prohibition

Read case analysis