Canada Case Law

R. v. Husbands

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court dismissed the appeal because the trial judge correctly admitted and weighed social context evidence, properly treated PTSD as a limited mitigating factor without requiring an NCR-level causal link, correctly applied the two-stage parole-ineligibility framework by imposing a fit life sentence and granting remedial recognition for harsh pre-trial conditions by not increasing parole ineligibility, and did not impose a demonstrably unfit sentence given the gravity of the mass public shooting and applicable sentencing principles.

Source excerpt

• Manslaughter
• Aggravated assault
• Social context evidence (irca)
• Post-traumatic stress disorder (ptsd)
• Provocation
• Parole ineligibility

Read case analysis

R. v. Peart

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Sentencing reasons for sexual assault and forcible confinement: 3.5 years’ imprisonment was imposed, with mandatory ancillary orders and no victim surcharge.

• Denunciation and deterrence
• Mitigating and aggravating factors
• Pre-sentence report and psychological assessment
• Ancillary orders (dna, soira, firearms prohibition)
• Bail conditions
• Sentencing

Read case analysis

R. v. Anderson

Court

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

IRCAs are a valuable and appropriate source of evidence to ensure systemic and background factors relevant to African Nova Scotian/Black offenders inform every stage of sentencing; sentencing judges must inquire into and consider those factors when crafting a proportionate sentence and may err in law by ignoring them; conditional sentences remain available where statutory prerequisites are satisfied and properly crafted conditions can address denunciation, deterrence and community safety; appellate guidance on methodology is warranted and the sentencing judge's conditional sentence (two years…

Source excerpt

• Conditional sentence
• Impact of race and culture assessment (irca)
• Systemic racism
• Section 718.2(e) criminal code
• Judicial notice
• Proportionality

Read case analysis

R. v. Morris

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Leave to intervene was granted because the issues transcend the interests of the parties, the proposed interveners possess relevant expertise and can offer distinct perspectives, and granting leave would not cause injustice provided conditions and limits were imposed (page orders and limitations on record and arguments).

Source excerpt

• Systemic racism in sentencing
• Background factors in sentencing
• Judicial notice
• Social context evidence
• Intervention procedure

Read case analysis