Sentencing

Maple Syrup Gone Wrong

R v Vallières, 2022 SCC 10 revolves around a criminal enterprise transacting stolen maple syrup. This case marks the ultimate decision regarding a decade-long, notorious maple syrup heist uncovered in 2012.

R v Nahanee: Notices and Further Submissions in Contested Sentencing Hearings

Content Warning: This article mentions instances of sexual violence that may be triggering for some readers. R v Nahanee, 2022 SCC 37 [Nahanee] is a case which addressed two key issues related to contested sentencing hearings following a guilty plea. The first issue was whether sentencing judges could depart from sentencing ranges proposed by the […]

R v Sharma: SCC to Determine whether Restrictions on Conditional Sentences Violate the Equality Rights of Indigenous Offenders

“The figures are stark and reflect what may fairly be termed a crisis.”

“Time Served” for Mandatory Minimum Sentences?: SCC Grants Leave to Appeal in Basque v The Queen

The Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) will revisit mandatory minimum sentences in Jennifer Basque v Her Majesty the Queen (SCC case no. 39997, leave to appeal granted March 10, 2022). This time, the SCC will consider whether pre-sentence prohibitions can, like “time served”, be credited to reduce a sentence below the mandatory minimum. Background Jennifer […]

Implementing ‘Impact of Race and Culture Assessments’ in the Sentencing of Black Nova Scotian Offenders: R v Anderson

How should criminal courts account for the existence of systemic and pervasive anti-Black racism when sentencing Black offenders? This is the question that the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal (“NSCA”) grappled with in R v Anderson, 2021 NSCA 62 [Anderson]. More specifically, the appellate court examined how evidence from ‘Impact of Race and Culture Assessments’ […]

R v Morris: Systemic Racism and the Sentencing of Black Offenders

Introduction The Ontario Court of Appeal [“ONCA”] opens the case of R v Morris, 2021 ONCA 680 [“Morris”] with a revolutionary admission that “it is beyond doubt that anti-Black racism […] continues to be, a reality in Canadian society, and in particular the Greater Toronto Area” (Morris, para 1). The appellate court’s powerful declaration is […]

Starting-Point Sentencing is Here to Stay, Supreme Court Rules in R v Parranto

In R v Parranto, 2021 SCC 46 [Parranto], the Supreme Court (“the Court”) weighed in on the criminal sentences of two drug traffickers in Alberta. In the process, they made powerful statements about individualized sentences, the power of provincial appeal courts and the future of criminal sentencing.

Appeal Watch: Consecutive Ineligible Parole Periods Deemed Unconstitutional in Attorney General of Quebec, et al. v. Alexandre Bissonnette

*TRIGGER WARNING: This post has descriptions of violence that may be triggering to some readers* Since the abolition of the death penalty, the highest sentence a judge can prescribe to a criminal offender is a life sentence with a 25-year parole ineligibility period. Where there are multiple murder victims, under s. 745.51 of the Criminal […]

SCC to Review Alberta’s 9-year "Starting Point" Sentence for Fentanyl Trafficking

Canada’s opioid crisis has been even deadlier than COVID-19. There were 16,364 apparent opioid-related deaths between January 2016 and March 2020, with the situation worsening during the current pandemic.

Sentencing Principles for Sexual Offences Against Children: SCC’s Stance in R v Friesen

Content warning: The following article contains content regarding sexual offences against a child that may be triggering for some readers.   What elements should be considered when determining sentencing principles for sexual offences against children? Are there special factors that need to be considered for these morally reprehensible offences, or do offenders deserve more certainty […]