Ontario Criminal


Judge erred in principle when he rejected joint submission

Appeal by accused from sentence imposed on him after he was convicted of impaired driving and driving with blood alcohol level above legal limit. Trial judge rejected joint submission and imposed additional term, which was additional year driving prohibition and community service. Appeal allowed. Judge erred in principle when he rejected joint submission. Joint submission appeared to be favourable to accused but it reflected host of factors which included money forfeited by accused despite withdrawal of drug charges, foregoing trial where there were triable issues and making full restitution for damages caused to other car. Sentence was set aside and sentence based on joint submission was accepted. Accused was sentenced to 35 days’ custody after he was credited with time served for pre-trial custody and he was prohibited from driving for one year.

R. v. Miljanovic

(Sep. 27, 2012, Ont. C.A., Sharpe, Simmons and Epstein JJ.A., File No. CA C55344) 103 W.C.B. (2d) 733.

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?