Ontario criminal | Appeal
SENTENCE APPEAL
Trial judge did not exercise discretion unreasonably in not giving credit for stringent bail conditions
Accused appealed his five-year sentence on weapons offences and asked that it be reduced to three years less credit for pre-sentence custody. Accused submitted sentencing judge erred by failing to give him any credit for his “stringent” bail conditions and that five years was unfit having regard to potential unconstitutionality of mandatory minimum sentence of three years for trafficking in firearms. Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed. Accused was on bail for 32 months. However, even in first five months, accused was not under house arrest, and overall his bail terms were anything but stringent. Indeed, accused used time on bail to further his rehabilitative efforts, which trial judge took into account in sentence she imposed. Accused’s counsel at trial did not ask for credit for his client’s bail conditions. Giving credit for time on bail was discretionary. Trial judge did not exercise that discretion unreasonably in not giving credit. Accused did not challenge constitutionality of three year minimum provision. These were very serious offences. Accused offered to sell six guns and his motive was entirely profit driven. Accused knew that proposed sales were illicit and that guns would be used for criminal purposes. In light of these aggravating considerations was sentence two years above mandatory minimum was entirely fit, even in light of accused’s demonstrated efforts to rehabilitate himself.
R. v. Waldron (Aug. 27, 2015, Ont. C.A., Laskin J.A., Hourigan J.A., and Pardu J.A., File No. CA C59301) 124 W.C.B. (2d) 324.
Trial judge did not exercise discretion unreasonably in not giving credit for stringent bail conditions
Accused appealed his five-year sentence on weapons offences and asked that it be reduced to three years less credit for pre-sentence custody. Accused submitted sentencing judge erred by failing to give him any credit for his “stringent” bail conditions and that five years was unfit having regard to potential unconstitutionality of mandatory minimum sentence of three years for trafficking in firearms. Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed. Accused was on bail for 32 months. However, even in first five months, accused was not under house arrest, and overall his bail terms were anything but stringent. Indeed, accused used time on bail to further his rehabilitative efforts, which trial judge took into account in sentence she imposed. Accused’s counsel at trial did not ask for credit for his client’s bail conditions. Giving credit for time on bail was discretionary. Trial judge did not exercise that discretion unreasonably in not giving credit. Accused did not challenge constitutionality of three year minimum provision. These were very serious offences. Accused offered to sell six guns and his motive was entirely profit driven. Accused knew that proposed sales were illicit and that guns would be used for criminal purposes. In light of these aggravating considerations was sentence two years above mandatory minimum was entirely fit, even in light of accused’s demonstrated efforts to rehabilitate himself.
R. v. Waldron (Aug. 27, 2015, Ont. C.A., Laskin J.A., Hourigan J.A., and Pardu J.A., File No. CA C59301) 124 W.C.B. (2d) 324.
