Federal court | Criminal Law
Sentencing
Types of sentence
Parole Board not required to balance Charter values
In November 2014, Board received information from Intelligence Unit of Niagara Regional Police Service that VB had been charged with offences pursuant to Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (“CDSA”) and Criminal Code. Board subsequently revoked pardon pursuant to section 7 of Criminal Records Act (“CRA”). VB brought application seeking judicial review of October 27, 2015 decision by Parole Board of Canada (“Board”) made pursuant to CRA to revoke pardon he was previously granted in 2008. Application dismissed. Board’s decision was reasonable. Board was not required to conduct balancing of Charter interests or values implicated in revocation of pardon with statutory objectives of CRA in absence of any such submissions to the Board from VB. Board was not, in circumstances of case, required to proactively conduct such balancing exercise. Board did not err in applying statutory provisions and exercising its discretion to revoke VB’s pardon based on information it relied on to determine that VB no longer met good conduct criteria.
Buffone v. Canada (Attorney General) (2017), 2017 CarswellNat 1308, 2017 FC 346, Catherine M. Kane J. (F.C.).
Types of sentence
Parole Board not required to balance Charter values
In November 2014, Board received information from Intelligence Unit of Niagara Regional Police Service that VB had been charged with offences pursuant to Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (“CDSA”) and Criminal Code. Board subsequently revoked pardon pursuant to section 7 of Criminal Records Act (“CRA”). VB brought application seeking judicial review of October 27, 2015 decision by Parole Board of Canada (“Board”) made pursuant to CRA to revoke pardon he was previously granted in 2008. Application dismissed. Board’s decision was reasonable. Board was not required to conduct balancing of Charter interests or values implicated in revocation of pardon with statutory objectives of CRA in absence of any such submissions to the Board from VB. Board was not, in circumstances of case, required to proactively conduct such balancing exercise. Board did not err in applying statutory provisions and exercising its discretion to revoke VB’s pardon based on information it relied on to determine that VB no longer met good conduct criteria.
Buffone v. Canada (Attorney General) (2017), 2017 CarswellNat 1308, 2017 FC 346, Catherine M. Kane J. (F.C.).
