Canada Case Law

R. v. R.S.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court held that the victim evidence and victim impact statement provided ample basis to find the offences caused serious psychological harm, which under s.42(5) precluded a deferred custody and supervision order; the youth court judge properly balanced aggravating and mitigating factors and the resulting 18-month custody and supervision order was not demonstrably unfit; fresh rehabilitative evidence did not alter the fitness of the disposition.

Source excerpt

• Sexual assault
• Sentence appeal
• Deferred custody and supervision order
• Youth sentencing principles

Read case analysis

R. v. Cole

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Sentence appeal in a child-pornography case dismissed; the Court also declared the six-month mandatory minimum under s. 163.1(4)(b) of the Criminal Code of no force and effect.

• Mandatory minimum
• Conditional sentence order
• Proportionality
• Rehabilitation
• Section 12 charter
• Youth sentencing principles

Read case analysis

R. v. K.O-M.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The trial judge lawfully applied former s.72 YCJA and, on the evidence, reasonably concluded a youth sentence of three years would not have been of sufficient length to hold the appellant accountable; the sentencing judge's discretionary decision to grant pre-sentence custody credit was entitled to deference; therefore the Court of Appeal grants leave to appeal but dismisses the sentence appeal and upholds the adult sentence.

Source excerpt

• Adult sentence under ycja
• Pre-sentence custody credit
• Human trafficking
• Youth sentencing principles
• Admission of fresh evidence

Read case analysis

R. v. T.D.R.

Court

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Because of the inexplicable and significant delay in bringing decade-old youth charges to court combined with police/administrative failures (including failure to record charges on CPIC and to follow youth-processes), the public interest in imposing custody was exhausted and a custodial sentence would not achieve meaningful consequences; therefore a reprimand was imposed for the youth offences.

Source excerpt

• Delay in prosecution
• Custody gateway
• Recording charges (cpic)
• Meaningful consequences
• Youth sentencing principles

Read case analysis

R. v. L.T.

Court

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

The three-month conviction and concurrent sentence for possession of clonazepam (valium) under s.4(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act must be set aside because Schedule IV drugs are not included in s.4(1); however, the aggregate 18-month custody and supervision order imposed for the more serious offences was appropriate and will be upheld because the concurrent lower sentences did not add to the global disposition; leave to appeal sentence is granted but the appeal is dismissed except for vitiation of the clonazepam conviction.

Source excerpt

• Custody eligibility
• Youth sentencing principles
• Hybrid offences and election
• Pre-trial custody credit
• Concurrent and consecutive sentences
• Charge substitution and invalid conviction

Read case analysis

R. v. S.N.J.S.

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal dismissed a youth offender’s sentence appeal for manslaughter, holding that the sentencing judge properly balanced YCJA principles and gave adequate reasons for a custodial portion.

• Youth sentencing principles
• Custody versus non-custodial alternatives
• Ycja s.38 and s.39(9) compliance
• Expert evidence on rehabilitation
• Accountability and proportionality
• Youth-sentencing

Read case analysis

R. v. Wong

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted the Crown’s YCJA adult-sentence application and imposed life imprisonment for first degree murder, plus a concurrent four-year term for discharging a firearm.

• Adult sentence designation
• First degree murder
• Firearm offence
• Youth sentencing principles
• Accountability
• Public protection

Read case analysis

R. v. Wellwood

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court ordered that two youths convicted of first degree murder be sentenced as adults, finding a youth sentence would not adequately hold either accountable.

• Adult sentence application under ycja
• Youth sentencing principles
• Parole ineligibility
• Sex offender registration
• Forensic dna sampling
• Ancillary firearms prohibitions

Read case analysis

R. c. D.N.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Majority: A sentencing judge must take pre-trial detention into account and, absent contrary application of discretion justified by LSJPA objectives, normally grant credit (commonly 1.5:1). In this case the trial judge erred by not crediting the appellant's 101 days; with ordinary credit the 90-day sentence would have been absorbed, so the appeal is allowed and the 90-day sentence is quashed while other sentence terms are maintained.

Source excerpt

• Pre-trial custody credit
• Youth sentencing principles
• Probation
• Rehabilitation

Read case analysis

R. v. J.S.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The youth court's disposition of 12 months probation was unfit because it failed to reflect the seriousness of an armed robbery and did not impose meaningful consequences or accountability as required by the Youth Criminal Justice Act; additionally the youth court erred by not granting a mandatory DNA order under s.487.051(1) of the Criminal Code; balancing the respondent's exceptional rehabilitation and support, the appropriate substituted disposition is three months' deferred custody followed by 12 months' probation with a DNA order.

Source excerpt

• Robbery
• Probation
• Deferred custody
• Dna order
• Mandatory dna
• Youth sentencing principles

Read case analysis