Canada Case Law

R. v. Pinsky

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court accepted the joint recommendation and set parole ineligibility at the statutory minimum of ten years given the offender's character, lack of record, spontaneous nature of the offence and parity with comparable cases; the sentencing judge has no jurisdiction to grant enhanced remand credit against a life sentence or against the parole ineligibility period, and the parole ineligibility period for this offender commences on his arrest date of October 11, 2024, with ancillary orders (primary DNA and lifetime firearms prohibition) imposed.

Source excerpt

• Second degree murder
• Parole ineligibility
• Joint submission
• Remand credit
• Dna order
• Firearms prohibition

Read case analysis

R. v. Sheepway

Court

Yukon Court of Appeal

The Yukon Court of Appeal held that harsh pre-sentencing custody can be considered when setting parole ineligibility above 10 years for second degree murder.

• Parole ineligibility
• Pre-sentencing custody
• Mitigating factors
• Life sentence
• Collateral consequences
• S.745.4 interpretation

Read case analysis

R. v. Willis

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Given the predatory home invasion, the brutal strangulation of an elderly vulnerable victim, the offender's extensive violent criminal history demonstrating high risk of future dangerousness, and after weighing mitigating evidence including the IRCA and offender's age, the appropriate period of parole ineligibility is set at 20 years; pre-sentence custody credit of 1,478 days (1:1) is awarded; ancillary orders (DNA, lifetime firearms prohibition, non-communication) are granted and victim fine surcharge is waived.

Source excerpt

• Second-degree murder
• Parole ineligibility
• Pre-sentence custody credit
• Aggravating factors
• Mitigating factors
• Impact of race and culture assessment (irca)

Read case analysis

Mayers v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed Ron Mayers’ judicial review of a Parole Board decision, finding no procedural unfairness in refusing postponement or proceeding by paper review.

• Procedural fairness
• Parole board review
• Postponement requests
• Paper review
• Role of assistant
• Procedural-fairness

Read case analysis

R. v. Lynds

Court

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

The court held that the offender had a reasonable excuse for non-payment because he has been incarcerated and the time to pay has not yet commenced; the court may change terms of the order under s.734.3 (but not the amount of the fine); it cannot lawfully extend parole ineligibility by making a default term operate consecutively to a life sentence in a way that affects parole ineligibility in light of Bissonnette; applying Abdelrazzaq the court therefore granted a lengthy extension of time to pay (until May 1, 2044) while preserving the existing default imprisonment term of three years in the…

Source excerpt

• Fine in lieu of forfeiture
• Committal for default
• Extension of time to pay fine
• Consecutive vs concurrent sentences
• Parole ineligibility

Read case analysis

R. v. Bacon

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

On a guilty plea to second-degree murder, the court imposed the mandatory life sentence and fixed parole ineligibility at 20 years on a joint recommendation.

• Second-degree murder
• Parole ineligibility period
• Mandatory life sentence
• Joint recommendation
• Second-degree-murder
• Sentencing

Read case analysis

R. v. Atkins

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The application judge correctly applied the statutory factors in s.745.61 and s.745.63, did not require an admission of guilt as a precondition, reasonably weighed the appellant's statements about gang involvement and responsibility, did not misapply Swietlinski, and therefore his discretionary decision to decline a jury hearing was within the broad range of reasonableness; appeal dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Parole ineligibility
• Judicial screening
• Gang-related offences
• Application to reduce parole ineligibility

Read case analysis

R. v. Dheensaw

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The joint submission was accepted because it was not demonstrably unhinged from the offence and offender; weighing aggravating factors (firearm, unprovoked killing, prior record, breach, victim impact) against mitigating factors (guilty plea, medical condition, rehabilitation, time served) produced a fit sentence of life imprisonment with 14 years parole ineligibility for second degree murder and nine years concurrent for attempted murder, together with specified ancillary orders.

Source excerpt

• Second degree murder
• Attempted murder
• Parole ineligibility
• Joint submission on sentence
• Victim impact statements
• Firearm offences

Read case analysis

R. v. Hollohan

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court granted a post-conviction referral to the Restorative Justice Program because judicial authority and protocol allow such referrals after conviction, the referral does not alter the life sentence or parole ineligibility determination, and the offender was found suitable based on age, lack of prior record, community supports and demonstrated sobriety; information from the referral may inform the Parole Ineligibility Hearing.

Source excerpt

• Second degree murder
• Restorative justice referral
• Parole ineligibility
• Sentencing principles
• Rehabilitation

Read case analysis

Chaif v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court allowed judicial review of a parole refusal, finding the Board’s reasons did not adequately explain why day parole posed undue risk compared with previously approved UTAs.

• Day parole
• Full parole
• Unescorted temporary absences (uta)
• Procedural fairness
• Reasonableness review
• Fettering of discretion

Read case analysis