Canada Case Law

R. v. Sidhu

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted the extension because the applicant demonstrated a bona fide intention to appeal, the Crown would not suffer undue prejudice from the delay, there is arguable merit to an appeal based on ineffective assistance of appointed counsel that could amount to a miscarriage of justice, and the interests of justice (including serious collateral immigration consequences) outweigh finality; accordingly time to appeal is extended to November 21, 2025.

Source excerpt

• Ineffective assistance of counsel
• Extension of time to appeal
• Criminal harassment (s. 264 criminal code)
• Miscarriage of justice
• Collateral immigration consequences

Read case analysis

R. v. Francois

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed Augustus Francois’s sentence appeal for robbery and attempted robbery, holding the sentence was fit and immigration consequences did not justify a lesser one.

• Robbery
• Attempted robbery
• Sentencing principles
• Denunciation and deterrence
• Youthful offender
• Collateral immigration consequences

Read case analysis

R. v. Lee

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Crown appeal allowed from a conditional sentence for aggravated assault; the Court held immigration consequences were given excessive weight and imposed 42 months’ imprisonment.

• Conditional sentence order
• Collateral immigration consequences
• Aggravated assault
• Weapons offences
• Proportionality in sentencing
• Sentence appeal

Read case analysis

R. v. R.B.-C.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court upheld the conviction because the trial judge made no reversible errors in assessing credibility or consent; however, the Court found the trial judge erred in the s.11(b) analysis by treating immigration-related sentencing queries and minor pandemic-related technical delays as exceptional circumstances, resulting in a net post-conviction delay exceeding the five-month presumptive ceiling and warranting reduction of the sentence from two years less a day to twenty months.

Source excerpt

• Sexual assault
• Consent
• Credibility assessment
• Post-conviction delay
• Section 11(b) charter
• Sentencing

Read case analysis

R. v. Rouse

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court held the verdicts were reconcilable because the evidence supporting possession of the cash was materially stronger and distinct from the evidence on the cocaine; the trial judge reasonably found the circumstantial evidence excluded any reasonable alternative to guilt on the proceeds count and thus did not commit a Villaroman error; and the trial judge properly considered collateral immigration consequences and imposed a sentence within the acceptable range.

Source excerpt

• Possession of proceeds of crime
• Possession for purpose of trafficking
• Resisting arrest
• Inconsistent verdicts
• Inferential reasoning (villaroman)
• Collateral immigration consequences

Read case analysis

R. v. Mills

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Because the trial judge conducted an effective post-plea inquiry about immigration consequences in the appellant's absence and accepted counsel's misleading assurances that the appellant had been advised, the proceedings in his absence engaged his vital interests, produced prejudice and a miscarriage of justice, and the conviction must be set aside and a new trial ordered; the designation of counsel did not cure the prejudice and the proviso did not apply.

Source excerpt

• Guilty plea validity
• Right to be present at trial
• Collateral immigration consequences
• Miscarriage of justice
• Designation of counsel
• Fresh evidence

Read case analysis

R. v. J.A.H.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Sentencing reasons for a stepfather convicted of sexual interference of two stepdaughters, resulting in a global 10-year penitentiary sentence and ancillary orders.

• Sexual interference
• Sentencing principles
• Aggravating and mitigating factors
• Abuse of trust/position of authority
• Totality principle
• Denunciation and deterrence

Read case analysis

R. c. Kabasele

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Appeal dismissed: the convictions stand because the elevator and apartment incidents were distinct with sufficient evidence (including video) supporting the elevator conviction; the s.11(b) delay claim fails because much delay was caused by the accused and no timely Charter objection was made; the 12‑month sentence is not manifestly unfit and cannot be reduced merely to avoid collateral immigration consequences.

Source excerpt

• Sexual assault
• Sequestration/forcible confinement
• Incompatible verdicts
• Single transaction rule
• Charter s.11(b) unreasonable delay
• Sentencing

Read case analysis

R. v. B.M.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court allowed the Crown's appeal, finding the sentencing judge erred by failing to give primary effect to denunciation and deterrence under s.718.01, by misapprehending the psychiatric evidence so as to ascribe a significant causal connection between mental illness and the offences, and by allowing immigration consequences and rehabilitation concerns to displace required sentencing objectives; accordingly the conditional sentence was set aside and a custodial sentence of seven years less time served was substituted.

Source excerpt

• Conditional sentence
• Denunciation and deterrence (s.718.01)
• Mental illness in sentencing
• Grooming of child victims
• Collateral immigration consequences

Read case analysis

R. v. Sousa

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court concluded the sentencing judge did not err in principle on immigration consequences or in treating denial as relevant to rehabilitation, but the ten-year sentence was a demonstrably unfit and excessive departure from applicable sentencing ranges despite the seriousness of the offence; the appropriate substituted sentence is eight years imprisonment (reduced to seven years, eight and a half months after presentence custody credit).

Source excerpt

• Sexual assault
• Sentencing principles
• Collateral immigration consequences
• Sentencing ranges
• First offender restraint

Read case analysis