Page: 1 PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - APPEAL DIVISION
|
|
- Hope Mason
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Page: 1 PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - APPEAL DIVISION Citation: J.J.C. (a young offender) v. R PESCAD 26 Date: Docket: S1-AD-0987 Registry: Charlottetown Publication Ban BETWEEN: AND: J.J.C. (a young offender) HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN APPELLANT RESPONDENT Before: The Honourable Chief Justice G.E. Mitchell The Honourable Mr. Justice J.A. McQuaid The Honourable Madam Justice L.K. Webber Appearances: W. Kent Brown, Q.C., Counsel for the Appellant Darrell E. Coombs, Counsel for the Respondent Place and Date of Hearing Place and Date of Judgment Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island September 9, 2003 Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island October 20, 2003 Written Reasons by: The Honourable Madam Justice L.K. Webber Concurred in by:
2 Page: 2 The Honourable Chief Justice G.E. Mitchell The Honourable Mr. Justice J.A. McQuaid YOUNG OFFENDER - Appeal of sentence - Violent offences Appeal of sentence by young offender after sentencing under Young Offenders Act. Sentencing appeal must consider the sentence in light of the provisions of the new Youth Criminal Justice Act. Authorities Cited: CASES CONSIDERED: R. v. Dunn, [1995] 1. S.C.R. 226 (SCC); R. v. D.L.C., [2003] N.J. No. 94 (Nfld.&Lab. Prov.Ct.); R. v. R.A.R., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 163 (SCC); R. v. Olah (1997), 33 O.R. (3d) 385 (Ont.C.A.); R. v. W.J.A., [1996] P.E.I.J. No. 95 (PEISCTD); N.A.J. v. R., 2003 PESCTD 60 (PESCTD); R. v. M.D.B., [2003] NWTJ No. 41, 2003 NWTCA 8; R. v. P.L.D., [2000] P.E.I.J. No. 123 (P.E.I.S.C.T.D.); R. v. McCraw, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 72 (SCC) STATUTES CONSIDERED: Youth Criminal Justice Act, S.C. 2002, c. 1, s.39.(1), s.39(1)(a); s.44(e), s.158, s.159, s.161(1); Young Offenders Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. Y-1; Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, Chap. C-46, s.687, s.722; Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-21, s.44(e) Reasons for judgment: WEBBER J.A.: [1] A youth, who pled guilty to one indictable and six summary conviction offences after a night spent inflicting considerable damage to the property of several Mount Stewart residents, causing a disturbance on another night and a breach of an undertaking to the court, appeals the custodial aspect of the sentence imposed by the trial judge. The first argument raised by counsel for the appellant is that the law requires this court on appeal to apply the provisions of the new Youth Criminal Justice Act, S.C. 2002, c. 1. He argues that even if the trial judge were correct at the time she imposed a custodial sentence under the Young Offenders Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. Y-1, the new law prohibits a judge from ordering a custodial sentence on the facts of this case and the new law must apply to this appeal. In the alternative, the appellant argues that the sentence was excessive and not in line with other sentences for similar offenders. BACKGROUND
3 Page: 3 [2] The facts surrounding the appellant s convictions were set out in his factum as follows: The cause disturbance [sic] on December 14, 2002 was the first charge in the sequence [of] offences. In that matter the appellant attended a dance at Morell High School in a highly intoxicated condition. He engaged in a verbal confrontation with school officials and damaged school property by kicking a door. He was detained by the school principal and turned over [to] the RCMP who lodged him overnight in custody. 4. The next offences were on the night of December 28, 2002, the appellant and the two others entered a residence in their community in search of car keys. When the occupant awoke, they fled the scene taking the occupant s jacket and an item of his property. From there, they proceeded to steal three cars which were damaged in the course of being driven. One of the vehicles was driven into the gas pumps at Mount Stewart Irving causing substantial damage. At the sentencing hearing the total damages from the night s events was listed at approximately $16, The appellant s prior record consisted of one alternative measures for theft in June The appellant was residing with his parents, who were supportive. His school reports indicated that he was having some difficulties, both behavioural and academic. Peer associations and alcohol abuse were the focus of concern in the Predisposition Report. The appellant s employment record was positive. [3] Following these events, the appellant was charged under the Young Offenders Act that he did commit the following offences, at or near Mount Stewart and Morell, Prince Edward Island, between December 13, 2002 and January 10, 2003: Indictable Offence Code Section Case Number a. Break and enter dwelling s.348(1)(b) P-1-FC
4 Page: 4 house Summary Conviction Offences Code Section Case Number b. Damage to property s. 430(1)(a) P-1-FC s. 430(4)(b) c. Take MV without consent s. 335(1) P-1-FC d. Take MV without consent s. 335(1) P-1-FC e. Take MV without consent s. 335(1) P-1-FC f. Cause disturbance by s.175(1)(a)(ii) P-1-FC Drunk g. Failure to comply with s. 145(5.5) P-1-FC undertaking He pled guilty to these offences and on each count was sentenced under the Young Offenders Act to three months secure custody followed by 21 months probation. DISPOSITION [4] I would allow the appeal and sentence the appellant to 24 months probation for each offence on the same conditions as those set by the Youth Court judge. REASONS [5] As the appellant correctly points out, the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Dunn, [1995] 1 S.C.R. 226 by majority found that s-s. 44(e) of the Interpretation Act. R.S.C. 1985, c. I-21 applies to an appeal as well as to a trial. Subsection 44(e) states: 44. Where an enactment, in this section called the former enactment, is repealed and another enactment, in this section called the new enactment, is substituted therefor,.....
5 Page: 5 (e) when any punishment, penalty or forfeiture is reduced or mitigated by the new enactment, the punishment, penalty or forfeiture if imposed or adjudged after the repeal shall be reduced or mitigated accordingly; The Supreme Court found that an appeal court s function comes within the meaning of adjudged. Therefore, states the appellant, the benefits of the provisions of the new Youth Criminal Justice Act in particular the prohibition against custodial sentences set out in s.39 should be applied to his situation. [6] Specifically, the appellant refers to s-s.39(1) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act: 39.(1) A youth justice court shall not commit a young person to custody under section 42 (youth sentences) unless (a) the young person has committed a violent offence; (b) the young person has failed to comply with noncustodial sentences; (c) (d) the young person has committed an indictable offence for which an adult would be liable to imprisonment for a term of more than two years and has a history that indicates a pattern of findings of guilt under this Act or the Young Offenders Act, chapter Y-1 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985; or in exceptional cases where the young person has committed an indictable offence, the aggravating circumstances of the offence are such that the imposition of a non-custodial sentence would be inconsistent with the purpose and principles set out in section 38. [7] The appellant s position is that his circumstances do not fall within any of the subclauses of s-s.39(1), so he shall not be committed into custody. [8] The respondent suggested that the transitional provisions of s.159 of the Youth Criminal Justice Act could be interpreted so as to avoid the application of R. v. Dunn. Section 159 states: 159.(1) Subject to section 161, where, before the coming into force of this
6 Page: 6 section, proceedings are commenced under the Young Offenders Act, chapter Y-1 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985 in respect of an offence within the meaning of that Act alleged to have been committed by a person who was at the time of the offence a young person within the meaning of that Act, the proceedings and all related matters shall be dealt with in all respects as if this Act had not come into force. (2) Subject to section 161, where, before the coming into force of this section, proceedings are commenced under the Juvenile Delinquents Act, chapter J-3 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1970, in respect of a delinquency within the meaning of that Act alleged to have been committed by a person who was at the time of the delinquency a child as defined in that Act, the proceedings and all related matters shall be dealt with under this Act as if the delinquency were an offence that occurred after the coming into force of this section. [9] The relevant portion of section 161 referred to in s.159 states: 161.(1) A person referred to in section 159 who is found guilty of an offence or delinquency, other than a person convicted of an offence in ordinary court, as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Young Offenders Act, Chapter Y-1 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985, shall be sentenced under this Act, except that (a) paragraph 110(2)(b) does not apply in respect of the offence or delinquency; and (b) paragraph 42(2)(r) applies in respect of the offence or delinquency only if the young person consents to its application. The provisions of this Act applicable to sentences imposed under section 42 apply in respect of the sentence. It is suggested that these sections could be read so as to place appeals within the category of related matters to be dealt with as if the new Act had not come into force (s-s.159(1)). [10] The findings of R. v. Dunn have been applied by the Supreme Court in subsequent cases, e.g. R. v. R.A.R., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 163 involving the application of the then new conditional sentencing provisions, as well as by other courts, e.g. R. v. Olah (1997), 33 O.R. (3d) 385 (Ont.C.A.) dealing with changes to parole eligibility. [11] In this province R. v. Dunn has been followed by this court in R. v. W.J.A., [1996] P.E.I.J. No. 95, considering new conditional sentence options, and more recently by the trial division in N.A.J. v. R., 2003 PESCTD 60. In the latter case, DesRoches C.J.T.D., was
7 Page: 7 considering the application of the provisions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act in a situation very similar to the case before this court - a youth sentenced while the Young Offenders Act was the law whose summary conviction appeal was being heard after the Youth Criminal Justice Act came into effect. In considering the appeal from sentence DesRoches C.J.T.D. applied the provisions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, as a result of R. v. Dunn and without needing to find error by the judge of first instance. [12] Interpreting the law in a different way, the Court in R. v. M.D.B., [2003] NWTJ No. 41, 2003 NWTCA 8 came to a different conclusion about the applicability of the Youth Criminal Justice Act to a sentence appeal where the sentence was handed down while the Young Offenders Act was law. That court stated: [8] In contrast to R. v. Dunn, [1995] 1 S.C.R. 226, there are specific transitional provisions in the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Moreover, we are not persuaded that s. 44(e) of the Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-21 is meant to govern this situation, namely, an entirely new statute replacing a previous one. Were this otherwise, any sentences imposed before April 1, 2003, but argued in an appeal court after that date, would have to be returned to the sentencing judge so that all the provisions in the new Act could be taken into account in crafting a sentence. We do not believe this was Parliament s intention, as it could result in great administrative uncertainty and complexity. With respect, I am unable to agree with these comments. [13] The fact the Youth Criminal Justice Act is an entirely new statute would not appear to provide any basis for suggesting the reasoning in R. v. Dunn regarding s-s. 44(e) of the Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-21 would not apply. That section specifically refers to the repeal of a former enactment and its replacement by another enactment called the new enactment. This is exactly the position we are in with the new Youth Criminal Justice Act which replaces the repealed Young Offenders Act. [14] As for the administrative problems created by including appeals within the meaning of adjudged in s-s. 44(e), these were recognized in the discussion of policy consideration by L Heureux-Dubé J. in her dissent in R. v. Dunn. Finally, given the appeal court s mandate in s.687 of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, Chap. C-46, there does not appear to be any basis for any matter being sent back to the sentencing judge: 687.(1) Where an appeal is taken against sentence, the court of appeal shall, unless the sentence is one fixed by law, consider the fitness of the sentence appealed against, and may on such evidence, if any, as it thinks fit to require or to receive,
8 Page: 8 (a) (b) vary the sentence within the limits prescribed by law for the offence of which the accused was convicted; or dismiss the appeal. (2) A judgment of a court of appeal that varies the sentence of an accused who was convicted has the same force and effect as if it were a sentence passed by the trial court. [Emphasis added] There has been no suggestion that sentences imposed under the Young Offenders Act were sentences fixed by law. Youth Court sentences, which have always contained a large discretionary element, would appear to be anything but fixed by law. As a result of s.687, this leaves the responsibility for sentencing in the hands of those hearing the appeal. [15] While it is true that the Youth Criminal Justice Act contains transitional provisions in ss , these provisions do not specifically address the impact of s-s.44(e) of the Interpretation Act. Section 159 of the Youth Criminal Justice Act does not state that appeals from sentence during the transition period shall be an exception to s-s.44(e) of the Interpretation Act. An appeal continues to be a proceeding encompassed by the word adjudged in s-s.44(e). Given the consistent application of that law since R. v. Dunn was decided in 1995, I am not prepared to read in or assume any intent to change the law. I am bound by the findings of R. v. Dunn. [16] There is no question that the punishment which may now be imposed on a young person pursuant to the provisions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act is reduced or mitigated from the punishment which could have been imposed under the provisions of the Young Offenders Act, repealed. Accordingly, pursuant to s-s. 44(e) of the Interpretation Act and following R. v. Dunn, the appellant is entitled to receive the benefit of the sentencing provisions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, without any need to find that the Youth court judge committed an error in sentencing. [17] The Youth Criminal Justice Act prohibits custodial sentences unless the provisions of s-s.39(1), cited above, apply. Furthermore, even if the circumstances of the young person fit within s-s.39(1), custody is not mandatory because of the operation of s-s.39(2) which provides as follows: 39. (2) If any of paragraphs (1)(a) to (c) apply, a youth justice court shall not impose a custodial sentence under section 42 (youth sentences) unless the court has considered all alternatives to custody raised at the sentencing hearing that are reasonable in the circumstances, and determined that there is not a reasonable alternative, or combination of alternatives, that is in
9 Page: 9 accordance with the purpose and principles set out in section 38. Also, as noted by DesRoches C.J.T.D. in N.A.J. v. R., supra and R. v. P.L.D., [2000] P.E.I.J. No. 123, when applying the provisions of s.39, in some circumstances it may even be an error of law to impose a custodial sentence on a first-time offender. [18] In considering whether the appellant should receive a custodial sentence, the only issue is whether the offences he committed were violent offences within the meaning of s-s.39(1)(a) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act. It is agreed that s-s.39(1)(b) to (d) are not applicable to the appellant. [19] While violent offence is not defined in the Youth Criminal Justice Act or the Criminal Code, the respondent cited case authority supporting an interpretation of that phrase that does not require the application or attempted application of physical force to another person; psychological or other trauma could also be the basis for finding that an offence was violent (See: R. v. D.L.C., [2003] N.J. No. 94 (Nfld. & Lab. Prov.Ct.)). In particular the respondent refers to the break and entry into the home of a Mt. Stewart resident. Home invasions have always been considered to be the most serious forms of break and enter offences; there is a great potential for physical harm to the person in residence, and it is a violation of the homeowner s sense of security. This is recognized by Parliament s imposition of liability to imprisonment for life for a break and enter committed in relation to a dwelling house, as opposed to the usual maximum of ten years for the indictable offence of break and enter under s.348 of the Criminal Code. [20] On the other hand, counsel for the appellant takes the position that violent offence in the Youth Criminal Justice Act refers primarily to offences against the person and none of the offences in this case are found in Part VIII of the Criminal Code entitled Offences Against the Person, citing in support of this position N.A.J. v. R., supra. [21] While violent offence is not defined in the Youth Criminal Justice Act, serious violent offence is defined as an offence in the commission of which a young person causes or attempts to cause serious bodily harm. A reasonable analogy can therefore be made that violent offence refers to one in which bodily harm has been caused to the victim albeit not serious bodily harm. In the Criminal Code bodily harm means any hurt or injury to a person that interferes with the health or comfort of the person and that is more than merely transient or trifling in nature. [Emphasis added.] This latter definition has been interpreted as referring to more than the physical battery of a person. In R. v. McCraw, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 72, the Supreme Court of Canada dealt with the question of whether or not the threat to rape contained in letters written by the accused constituted a threat to cause serious bodily harm. In the course of his analysis, Cory J. writing for the court stated:
10 Page: 10 [22] Does the phrase encompass psychological harm? I think that it must. The term "bodily harm" referred to in s. 267 is defined as "any hurt or injury". Those words are clearly broad enough to include psychological harm. Since s refers to any "serious" hurt or injury then any serious or substantial psychological harm must come within its purview. So long as the psychological harm substantially interferes with the health or well-being of the complainant, it properly comes within the scope of the phrase "serious bodily harm". There can be no doubt that psychological harm may often be more pervasive and permanent in its effect than any physical harm. I can see no principle of interpretation nor any policy reason for excluding psychological harm from the scope of s (1)(a) of the Code. Therefore, where there is evidence of a significant impact upon the emotional or mental health of a person, the offence is, indeed, a violent one. [22] In most cases involving crimes the facts must be proven or admitted to support a conviction; in the case of bodily assaults, those facts will contain within them the factual circumstances that establish the assault and thus the bodily harm. However, not all convictions come after such facts are proven or admitted. [23] The respondent s position is essentially an argument that irrespective of the proven facts surrounding a crime, the court should be prepared to classify certain crimes as inherently violent and thus falling within the ambit of paragraph 39(1)(a). In the instant case this involves deciding first, whether or not a home invasion is also an inherently violent offence irrespective of any proof of bodily harm at trial and, second, whether or not the evidence at trial was sufficient to bring the other crimes to which the appellant pleaded guilty within the category of violent offence. [24] While it is true that some crimes, such as murder, are inherently violent offences, I hesitate to categorize a home invasion as a violent offence within the meaning of paragraph 39(1)(a). As others have noted, the Youth Criminal Justice Act has an overall approach that encourages sentencing options other than incarceration. Therefore, where alternative interpretations are reasonable, it seems prudent to avoid interpretations that place a youth in the position where incarceration is authorized. Unless an offence is, like murder, inherently violent and thus one where bodily harm must be assumed, the evidence presented at trial must prove the existence of bodily harm of a more than transient or trifling nature in order to give rise to the applicability of paragraph 39(1)(a). Where the Crown wants to argue the commission of a violent offence where such violence has not been proven at trial and cannot necessarily be inferred (as in a case
11 Page: 11 of murder), facts in support of this argument will need to be proven at the time of sentencing. [25] There is no evidence of bodily harm in the agreed-upon facts of this case. While the damage to property has a violent aspect to it, that violence does not consist of physical harm to persons. [26] This is not to say that offences such as the ones in the instant case could not result in bodily harm and in those circumstances be classified as violent offences. For example, if as a result of an offender s actions the owner of the properties involved suffered psychological or emotional trauma, the crimes could be considered violent offences. [27] There seems little doubt that victim impact statements can be used to provide the court with the information it requires for such an assessment. While those statements are not sworn and so not proven as would be other evidence, Parliament has given those statements special status essentially equivalent to evidence at a sentencing hearing: 722.(1) For the purpose of determining the sentence to be imposed on an offender or whether the offender should be discharged pursuant to section 730 in respect of any offence, the court shall consider any statement that may have been prepared in accordance with subsection (2) of a victim of the offence describing the harm done to, or loss suffered by, the victim arising from the commission of the offence. (2) A statement referred to in sub section (1) must be (a) prepared in writing in the form and in accordance with the procedures established by a program designated for that purpose by the lieutenant governor in council of the province in which the court is exercising its jurisdiction; and (b) filed with the court. (2.1) The court shall, on the request of a victim, permit the victim to read a statement prepared and filed in accordance with subsection (2), or to present the statements in any other manner that the court considers appropriate.
12 Page: 12 (3) Whether or not a statement has been prepared and filed in accordance with subsection (2), the court may consider any other evidence concerning any victim of the offence for the purpose of determining the sentence to be imposed on the offender or whether the offender should be discharged under section 730. [emphasis added] (4) For the purposes of this section and section 722.2, victim, in relation to an offence, (a) means a person to whom harm was done or who suffered physical or emotional loss as a result of the commission of the offence; and (b) where the person described in paragraph (a) is dead, ill or otherwise incapable of making a statement referred to in subsection (1), includes the spouse or common-law partner or any relative of that person, anyone who has in law or fact the custody of that person or is responsible for the care or support of that person or any dependant of that person. [28] Two victim impact statements were filed in this case. One victim noted it was scary to get a telephone call from the R.C.M.P. early in the morning and that person dreaded going to see the damage done to the car. This person no longer feels comfortable leaving her children where the appellant might be present within the community and the children are more watchful after the incident. The other victim impact statement referred to anger, hurt and inconvenience, while expressing the hope that the appellant received help to prevent this from happening again. [29] While these statements indicate that the actions of the appellant had an impact upon the comfort level of the victims, I cannot conclude from what is said in those statements that these people were harmed to the extent required for these crimes to be considered violent offences. The overall thrust of the Youth Criminal Justice Act suggests that the exceptions to the noncustodial rule in sentencing relate to situations of a nature that stand out for more extreme punishment. An assessment must be made. Without in any way diminishing the impact of any crime upon a victim, it is necessary for the court to interpret all provisions in a manner that reflects Parliament s intent as far as possible. In my view, the evidence regarding these crimes in the instant case does not meet the test required to prove they were violent offences within the meaning of paragraph 39(1)(a).
13 Page: 13 [30] During the appeal the Predisposition Report presented at trial was updated by Brooke Mitchell of Probation Services. She advised the court that while the appellant was awaiting his appeal, having been released on an undertaking with certain conditions, he breached those conditions, was fined $400. for that breach, was charged with additional offences and at the time of the appeal was in custody. [31] All of this does not give this court any different sentencing options under the Youth Criminal Justice Act because those actions still do not fit within the requirements of s-s.39(1). The breach of an undertaking is not in law a breach of a non-custodial sentence, so an argument under paragraph 39(1)(b) does not arise. [32] Therefore, a custodial sentence is not an option available to this court in the sentencing of the appellant. [33] The evidence before the court is that the appellant has no prior record of offences. However, his behaviour at school has been problematic, his parents cannot control him, and he appears to have addictions problems. The update on the appellant s predisposition report also indicated that in June he was suspended from school for five days for being under the influence of alcohol; he received no credits for his year s work; and the school was resistant to having him back. On August 8 th the appellant breached the curfew imposed as part of his undertaking. For this breach he was fined $400. At the same time, he was charged with resisting arrest. He has been in custody since and the update indicated he was doing well while in custody. He had paid $205. towards restitution, done 125 hours of community service, and reported as required. [34] Given the evident needs of the appellant for close supervision, I order the appellant placed on probation for a period of 24 months for each offence. This is the maximum period allowed and appears appropriate given the serious nature of the offences and the particular problems facing the appellant, as outlined in the predisposition report. [35] As for the terms of the probation, the terms set by the Youth Court judge at trial were quite thorough and stringent. These included restitution, barring the appellant s contact with the others involved in the offence, barring him from the premises of the victims, requiring community service work, requiring an apology to each victim, and requiring counselling and treatment where it is found necessary. I find the conditions set by the Youth Court judge reasonable considering the offences and the youth involved. Therefore, for each offence, I order the appellant placed on probation for a period of 24 months on the same conditions as set by the Youth Court judge.
14 Page: 14 The Honourable Madam Justice L.K. Webber I AGREE: The Honourable Chief Justice G.E. Mitchell I AGREE: The Honourable Mr. Justice J.A. McQuaid
PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - APPEAL DIVISION HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN STACEY REID BLACKMORE
Date: 19991207 Docket: AD-0832 Registry: Charlottetown PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - APPEAL DIVISION BETWEEN: AND: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN STACEY REID BLACKMORE APPELLANT RESPONDENT
More informationPROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION. Her Majesty the Queen. against. Corey Blair Clarke
Citation: R v Clarke Date:20050216 2005 PCSCTD 10 Docket:S 1 GC 384 Registry: Charlottetown PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION Her Majesty the Queen against Corey Blair
More informationISSUES. Saskatoon Criminal Defence Lawyers Association December 1, Fall Seminar, 1998: Bail Hearings and Sentencing. Prepared by: Andrew Mason
SENTENCING ISSUES Saskatoon Criminal Defence Lawyers Association December 1, 1998 Fall Seminar, 1998: Bail Hearings and Sentencing Prepared by: Andrew Mason Also available to members at the SCDLA Web site:
More informationCitation: R. v. Cullen Date: PESCAD 16 Docket: AD-0862 Registry: Charlottetown
Citation: R. v. Cullen Date: 20000517 2000 PESCAD 16 Docket: AD-0862 Registry: Charlottetown PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - APPEAL DIVISION BETWEEN: AND: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
More informationCitation: R. v. R.C. (P.) Date: PESCTD 22 Docket: GSC Registry: Charlottetown
Citation: R. v. R.C. (P.) Date: 2000308 2000 PESCTD 22 Docket: GSC-17475 Registry: Charlottetown BETWEEN: AND: PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
More informationCrimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 92
New South Wales Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 92 Summary of contents Part 1 Preliminary Part 2 Penalties that may be imposed Division 1 General Division 2 Alternatives to full-time detention
More informationSentencing Act Examinable excerpts of PART 1 PRELIMINARY. 1 Purposes
Examinable excerpts of Sentencing Act 1991 as at 10 April 2018 1 Purposes PART 1 PRELIMINARY The purposes of this Act are (a) to promote consistency of approach in the sentencing of offenders; (b) to have
More information1990 CHAPTER S HER MAJESTY, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan, enacts as follows:
1990 CHAPTER S-63.1 An Act respecting Summary Offences Procedure and Certain consequential amendments resulting from the enactment of this Act (Assented to June 22, 1990) HER MAJESTY, by and with the advice
More informationSentencing and the Correctional System. Chapter 11
Sentencing and the Correctional System Chapter 11 1 Once a person has been found guilty of committing a crime, the judge imposes a sentence, or punishment. Generally, the goals of sentencing are to punish
More informationIntroduction to Sentencing and Corrections
Introduction to Sentencing and Corrections Traditional Objectives of Sentencing retribution, segregation, rehabilitation, and deterrence. Political Perspectives on Sentencing Left Left Wing Wing focus
More informationPROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. MacLean, 2015 NSPC 70. v. Nathan Fred Grant MacLean SENTENCING DECISION
PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. MacLean, 2015 NSPC 70 Date: 2015-10-15 Docket: 2825618 Registry: Pictou Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. Nathan Fred Grant MacLean SENTENCING DECISION Restriction
More informationPenalties and Sentences Act 1985
Penalties and Sentences Act 1985 No. 10260 TABLE OF PROVISIONS Section 1. Purposes. 2. Commencement. 3. Definitions. PART 1 PRELIMINARY PART 2 GENERAL SENTENCING PROVISIONS 4. Court may take guilty plea
More informationCHAPTER Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 1282
CHAPTER 97-69 Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 1282 An act relating to imposition of adult sanctions upon children; amending s. 39.059, F.S., relating to community control or commitment of children
More informationCitation: R. v. Long Date: PESCTD 87 Docket: S-1-GC-71 Registry: Charlottetown
Citation: R. v. Long Date: 20011030 2001 PESCTD 87 Docket: S-1-GC-71 Registry: Charlottetown PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN -against- JAMES
More informationSection 810. This booklet explains the 810 process, what your rights are and how to get legal help.
INFORMATION FOR FEDERAL PRISONERS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA Section 810 The Criminal Code of Canada allows a judge or justice of the peace to require you to enter into a recognizance (like a peace bond) if there
More informationIntroduction to Criminal Law
Introduction to Criminal Law CHAPTER CONTENTS Introduction 2 Crimes versus Civil Wrongs 2 Types of Criminal Offences 3 General Principles of Criminal Law 4 Accessories and Parties to Crimes 5 Attempted
More informationThe Criminal Justice System: From Charges to Sentencing
The Criminal Justice System: From Charges to Sentencing The Key Principles The aim the system is to protect and to regulate society, to punish offenders and to offer rehabilitation; The Government, through
More informationSUPREME COURT OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN. - against - FRANCES GEORGINA LAMOUREUX. BEFORE: The Honourable Justice Wayne D.
SUPREME COURT OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND Citation: R. v. Lamoureux 2011 PESC 03 Date: 20110225 Docket: S1-GC-799 Registry: Charlottetown HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN - against - FRANCES GEORGINA LAMOUREUX BEFORE:
More informationDomestic Violence, Crime and Victims Bill [HL]
[AS AMENDED IN STANDING COMMITTEE E] CONTENTS PART 1 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ETC Amendments to Part 4 of the Family Law Act 1996 1 Breach of non-molestation order to be a criminal offence 2 Additional considerations
More informationDOWNLOAD PDF STEVENS ON INDICTABLE OFFENCES AND SUMMARY CONVICTIONS
Chapter 1 : Criminal Offence Penalty Chart Note: Citations are based on reference standards. However, formatting rules can vary widely between applications and fields of interest or study. The specific
More informationRULES GOVERNING THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY RULE 3:21. SENTENCE AND JUDGMENT; WITHDRAWAL OF PLEA; PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION; PROBATION
RULES GOVERNING THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY RULE 3:21. SENTENCE AND JUDGMENT; WITHDRAWAL OF PLEA; PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION; PROBATION Rule 3:21-1. Withdrawal of Plea A motion to withdraw a plea
More informationCrimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Standard Minimum Sentencing) Act 2002 No 90
New South Wales Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Standard Minimum Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Amendment of Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 92 and other Acts 2 Schedules
More informationChapter 340. Bail Act Certified on: / /20.
Chapter 340. Bail Act 1977. Certified on: / /20. INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA. Chapter 340. Bail Act 1977. ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. PART I PRELIMINARY. 1. Interpretation. bail bail authority
More informationCHAPTER FIFTEEN SENTENCING OF ADULT SEXUAL OFFENDERS
CHAPTER FIFTEEN SENTENCING OF ADULT SEXUAL OFFENDERS Author: LILLIAN ARTZ 1 Criminologist Institute of Criminology, Faculty of Law University of Cape Town 1. INTRODUCTION Recent case law relating to rape
More informationFlorida Senate SB 170 By Senator Lynn
By Senator Lynn 1 A bill to be entitled 2 An act relating to the sentencing of youthful 3 offenders; amending s. 958.04, F.S.; 4 prohibiting the court from sentencing a person 5 as a youthful offender
More informationSentencing Options. Introduction to Sentencing and Corrections Traditional Objectives of Sentencing
Introduction to Sentencing and Corrections Traditional Objectives of Sentencing retribution, segregation, rehabilitation, and deterrence (general & specific) Political Perspectives on Sentencing Left Wing
More informationJUDGMENT. R v Smith (Appellant)
Trinity Term [2011] UKSC 37 On appeal from: [2010] EWCA Crim 530 JUDGMENT R v Smith (Appellant) before Lord Phillips, President Lord Walker Lady Hale Lord Collins Lord Wilson JUDGMENT GIVEN ON 20 July
More informationS G C. Dangerous Offenders. Sentencing Guidelines Council. Guide for Sentencers and Practitioners
S G C Sentencing Guidelines Council Dangerous Offenders Guide for Sentencers and Practitioners CONTENTS PART ONE Introduction 5 PART TWO PART THREE Criteria for imposing sentences under the dangerous
More informationCHAPTER TWO: YOUTH JUSTICE
CHAPTER TWO: YOUTH JUSTICE TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER TWO: YOUTH JUSTICE... 1 I. INTRODUCTION... 1 A. LSLAP AND YOUTH JUSTICE... 1 B. HISTORY OF LEGISLATIVE CHANGES... 1 II. GOVERNING LEGISLATION AND RESOURCES...
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA
Citation: R v Yare, 2018 MBCA 114 Date: 20181031 Docket: AR18-30-09033 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Coram: Mr. Justice William J. Burnett Madam Justice Janice L. lemaistre Madam Justice Karen I.
More informationSuperior Court of Washington For Pierce County
Superior Court of Washington For Pierce County State of Washington, Plaintiff vs.. Defendant No. Statement of Defendant on Plea of Guilty to Sex Offense (STTDFG) 1. My true name is:. 2. My age is:. 3.
More informationSex Crimes: Definitions and Penalties Montana
Sex Crimes: Definitions and Penalties Montana Sexual Intercourse Without Consent Last Updated: December 2017 What are the punishments for this crime? A person who knowingly has sexual intercourse without
More informationSentencing hearing after conviction for impaired driving; determination of grossly aggravating and aggravating and mitigating factors;
20-179. Sentencing hearing after conviction for impaired driving; determination of grossly aggravating and aggravating and mitigating factors; punishments. (a) Sentencing Hearing Required. After a conviction
More informationNC General Statutes - Chapter 15A Article 46 1
Article 46. Crime Victims' Rights Act. 15A-830. Definitions. (a) The following definitions apply in this Article: (1) Accused. A person who has been arrested and charged with committing a crime covered
More informationS G C. Reduction in Sentence. for a Guilty Plea. Definitive Guideline. Sentencing Guidelines Council
S G C Sentencing Guidelines Council Reduction in Sentence for a Guilty Plea Definitive Guideline Revised 2007 FOREWORD One of the first guidelines to be issued by the Sentencing Guidelines Council related
More informationProvince of Alberta CORRECTIONS ACT. Revised Statutes of Alberta 2000 Chapter C-29. Current as of October 1, Office Consolidation
Province of Alberta CORRECTIONS ACT Revised Statutes of Alberta 2000 Current as of October 1, 2011 Office Consolidation Published by Alberta Queen s Printer Alberta Queen s Printer Suite 700, Park Plaza
More informationKey Legal Terms: When Charges are Laid in a Domestic Dispute
Key Legal Terms: When Charges are Laid in a Domestic Dispute Assault Assault is when one person intentionally applies force to another person, or attempts or threatens to apply force to another person,
More informationISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
BAIL HEARINGS ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Saskatoon Criminal Defence Lawyers Association December 1, 1998 Fall Seminar, 1998: Bail Hearings and Sentencing Also available to members at the SCDLA Web site: http://www.lexicongraphics.com/scdla.htm
More informationCrimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment Bill 2007
First print New South Wales Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment Bill 2007 Explanatory note This explanatory note relates to this Bill as introduced into Parliament. Overview of Bill The object of this
More informationChapter 381. Probation Act Certified on: / /20.
Chapter 381. Probation Act 1979. Certified on: / /20. INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA. Chapter 381. Probation Act 1979. ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. PART I PRELIMINARY. 1. Compliance with Constitutional
More informationMISSOURI VICTIMS RIGHTS LAWS¹
CONSTITUTION Article I, 32. Crime victims' rights MISSOURI VICTIMS RIGHTS LAWS¹ 1. Crime victims, as defined by law, shall have the following rights, as defined by law: (1) The right to be present at all
More informationNumber 14 of Criminal Justice Act 2017
Number 14 of 2017 Criminal Justice Act 2017 Number 14 of 2017 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2017 Section 1. Definition CONTENTS 2. Amendment of Criminal Justice Act 1984 3. Amendment of Criminal Justice (Public
More informationThe Profits of Criminal Notoriety Act
1 PROFITS OF CRIMINAL NOTORIETY c. P-28.1 The Profits of Criminal Notoriety Act being Chapter P-28.1 of The Statutes of Saskatchewan, 2009 (effective May 14, 2009). NOTE: This consolidation is not official
More informationBreach Offences Guideline Consultation 61. Annex C: ANNEX C. Draft guidelines. Breach of a Community Order Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Schedule 8)
Breach Offences Guideline Consultation 61 Annex C: Draft guidelines Breach of a Community Order Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Schedule 8) 62 Breach Offences Guideline Consultation Breach of Community Order
More informationCOURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF MANITOBA
Date: 20171121 Docket: YO 16-01-35006 (Winnipeg Centre) Indexed as: R. v. Green Cited as: 2017 MBQB 181 COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF MANITOBA BETWEEN: ) APPEARANCES: ) HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ) Cindy Sholdice
More informationCRIMINAL LAW JURISDICTION, PROCEDURE, AND THE COURTS. February 2017
CRIMINAL LAW JURISDICTION, PROCEDURE, AND THE COURTS February 2017 Prepared for the Supreme Court of Nevada by Ben Graham Governmental Advisor to the Judiciary Administrative Office of the Courts 775-684-1719
More informationALABAMA VICTIMS RIGHTS LAWS1
ALABAMA VICTIMS RIGHTS LAWS1 Constitution Art. I, 6.01 Basic rights for crime victims. (a) Crime victims, as defined by law or their lawful representatives, including the next of kin of homicide victims,
More informationExaminable excerpts of. Bail Act as at 30 September 2018 PART 1 PRELIMINARY
Examinable excerpts of Bail Act 1977 as at 30 September 2018 1A Purpose PART 1 PRELIMINARY The purpose of this Act is to provide a legislative framework for the making of decisions as to whether a person
More informationSubject: Offences Committed Against Peace Officers Date: October 2015
Manitoba Department of Justice Prosecutions Policy Directive Guideline No. 2:PRO:1 Subject: Offences Committed Against Peace Officers Date: October 2015 POLICY STATEMENT: Peace officers are on the front
More informationSession of SENATE BILL No By Committee on Judiciary 2-1
Session of 0 SENATE BILL No. By Committee on Judiciary - 0 0 0 AN ACT concerning crimes, punishment and criminal procedure; relating to criminal discharge of a firearm; sentencing; amending K.S.A. 0 Supp.
More informationA GUIDE TO CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION AUTHORITY (CICA) CLAIMS
A GUIDE TO CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION AUTHORITY (CICA) CLAIMS What is the CICA? The CICA is a government-funded Scheme, designed to compensate blameless victims of violent crime, which includes sexual
More informationPage: 1 PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - APPEAL DIVISION
Page: 1 PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - APPEAL DIVISION Citation: Attorney General (PEI) v. Thompson et al. 2003 PESCAD 18 Date: 20030623 Docket: S1-AD-0957 Registry: Charlottetown
More informationCRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT (N0. 2) ACT 2000 BERMUDA 2000 : 23 CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT (N0. 2) ACT 2000
BERMUDA 2000 : 23 [Date of Assent 11 July 2000] [Operative Date ] WHEREAS it is expedient to amend the Criminal Code Act 1907 to make further provision with respect to sex offenders and violent offenders:
More informationAN ACT. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Ohio:
(131st General Assembly) (Amended Substitute Senate Bill Number 97) AN ACT To amend sections 2152.17, 2901.08, 2923.14, 2929.13, 2929.14, 2929.20, 2929.201, 2941.141, 2941.144, 2941.145, 2941.146, and
More informationREVISOR XX/BR
1.1 A bill for an act 1.2 relating to public safety; eliminating stays of adjudication and stays of imposition 1.3 in criminal sexual conduct cases; requiring sex offenders to serve lifetime 1.4 conditional
More informationABOLITION OF CAPITAL AND CORPORAL PUNISHMENT ACT 1999 BERMUDA 1999 : 51 ABOLITION OF CAPITAL AND CORPORAL PUNISHMENT ACT 1999
BERMUDA : 51 ABOLITION OF CAPITAL AND CORPORAL PUNISHMENT ACT [Date of Assent 23 December ] [Operative Date 23 December ] WHEREAS it is expedient to amend the Criminal Code to abolish capital and corporal
More informationCRIMES (AMENDMENT) ACT 1989 No. 198
CRIMES (AMENDMENT) ACT 1989 No. 198 NEW SOUTH WALES TABLE OF PROVISIONS 1. Short title 2. Commencement 3. Amendment of Crimes Act 1900 No. 40 ASSAULT SCHEDULE 2 - AMENDMENTS RELATING TO PENALTIES CRIMES
More informationColorado Legislative Council Staff
Colorado Legislative Council Staff Distributed to CCJJ, November 9, 2017 Room 029 State Capitol, Denver, CO 80203-1784 (303) 866-3521 FAX: 866-3855 TDD: 866-3472 leg.colorado.gov/lcs E-mail: lcs.ga@state.co.us
More information2010 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. Govt. Works
Page 1 2010 CarswellOnt 8109 R. v. Allen Her Majesty the Queen against Andre Allen Ontario Court of Justice M. Then J.P. Heard: October 19, 2010 Judgment: October 19, 2010 Docket: None given. Thomson Reuters
More informationBILL NO. 15. Highway Traffic (Combating Impaired Driving) Amendment Act
HOUSE USE ONLY CHAIR: WITH / WITHOUT 3rd SESSION, 64th GENERAL ASSEMBLY Province of Prince Edward Island 61 ELIZABETH II, 2012 BILL NO. 15 Highway Traffic (Combating Impaired Driving) Amendment Act Honourable
More informationSENATE BILL 738. E3, E2 7lr0368 CHAPTER. Criminal Procedure Offender Registry Minors
SENATE BILL E, E lr0 By: Senators Frosh and Garagiola Introduced and read first time: February, 00 Assigned to: Rules Re referred to: Judicial Proceedings, February, 00 Committee Report: Favorable with
More informationBail Act 1977 Stage Two - to commence 1 July 2018
Stage Two - to commence 1 July 2018 Section TABLE OF PROVISIONS Page Part 1 Preliminary 4 1 Short title and commencement 4 1A Purpose 1B Guiding Principles 2 Repeals and savings 5 3 Definitions 5 3AAAA
More informationAnnex C: Draft guidelines
Intimidatory Offences and Domestic abuse guidelines Consultation 53 Annex C: Draft guidelines Overarching Principles: Domestic Abuse Applicability of the Guideline In accordance with section 120 of the
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA
Citation: R v Gladue, 2018 MBCA 89 Date: 20180910 Docket: AR18-30-09021 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Coram: Madam Justice Holly C. Beard Madam Justice Diana M. Cameron Madam Justice Jennifer A. Pfuetzner
More informationVictims Rights and Support Act 2013 No 37
New South Wales Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 No 37 Contents Part 1 Part 2 Preliminary Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Definitions 2 Victims rights Division 1 Preliminary 4 Object of Part
More informationNo. 51,840-KA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *
Judgment rendered January 10, 2018. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 992, La. C. Cr. P. No. 51,840-KA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * *
More information80th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Regular Session. Senate Bill 966 SUMMARY
Sponsored by COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY 0th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--0 Regular Session Senate Bill SUMMARY The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the measure and is not a part of the
More information2004 No (N.I. 15) NORTHERN IRELAND. The Criminal Justice (No. 2) (Northern Ireland) Order 2004
STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 2004 No. 1991 (N.I. 15) NORTHERN IRELAND The Criminal Justice (No. 2) (Northern Ireland) Order 2004 Made - - - - - 27th July 2004 Coming into operation - - 26th September 2004 ARRANGEMENT
More informationPROTECTION FOR PERSONS IN CARE ACT
Province of Alberta Statutes of Alberta, Current as of February 20, 2015 Office Consolidation Published by Alberta Queen s Printer Queen s Printer Bookstore Suite 700, Park Plaza 10611-98 Avenue Edmonton,
More informationTHE CONSTITUTION (SENTENCING GUIDELINES FOR COURTS OF JUDICATURE) (PRACTICE) DIRECTIONS, 2013 ARRANGEMENT OF PARAGRAPHS
THE CONSTITUTION (SENTENCING GUIDELINES FOR COURTS OF JUDICATURE) (PRACTICE) DIRECTIONS, 2013 Paragraph ARRANGEMENT OF PARAGRAPHS PART I PRELIMINARY 1. Title. 2. Application. 3. Objectives of these Practice
More information"SOME THOUGHTS ON GUILTY PLEAS AND SENTENCING"
"SOME THOUGHTS ON GUILTY PLEAS AND SENTENCING" ( ( )',~- These materials were prepared by Patrick Reis, of Saskatchewan Legal Aid Commission (Regina Rural Office) Regina, Saskatchewan for thesaskatchewan
More informationAN ACT RELATING TO DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR OR DRUGS; INCREASING THE PENALTY FOR HOMICIDE BY
AN ACT RELATING TO DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR OR DRUGS; INCREASING THE PENALTY FOR HOMICIDE BY VEHICLE WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR OR DRUGS; INCREASING PENALTIES
More informationCitation: Gallant v. Piccott Date: PESCAD 17 Docket: AD-0859 Registry: Charlottetown
Citation: Gallant v. Piccott Date: 20000518 2000 PESCAD 17 Docket: AD-0859 Registry: Charlottetown PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - APPEAL DIVISION BETWEEN: STEPHEN ARTHUR PICCOTT,
More informationSUMMARY PROCEEDINGS ACT
c t SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS ACT PLEASE NOTE This document, prepared by the Legislative Counsel Office, is an office consolidation of this Act, current to December 2, 2015. It is intended for information and
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: R. v. Miljevic, 2011 SCC 8 DATE: DOCKET: 33714
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: R. v. Miljevic, 2011 SCC 8 DATE: 20110216 DOCKET: 33714 BETWEEN: Marko Miljevic Appellant and Her Majesty The Queen Respondent CORAM: McLachlin C.J. and Deschamps, Fish,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO Opinion Number: Filing Date: August 17, 2012 Docket No. 30,788 STATE OF NEW MEXICO, v. Plaintiff-Appellee, ADRIAN NANCO, Defendant-Appellant. APPEAL FROM
More informationPenal Code (Amendment) Bill
Bill No. 33/2012. Penal Code (Amendment) Bill Read the first time on 15th October 2012. A BILL intituled An Act to amend the Penal Code (Chapter 224 of the 2008 Revised Edition). Be it enacted by the President
More informationCOURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF MANITOBA
Summary conviction appeal from a Judicial Justice of the Peace and Provincial Court Judge Date: 20181031 Docket: CR 17-01-36275 (Winnipeg Centre) Indexed as: R. v. Grant Cited as: 2018 MBQB 171 COURT OF
More informationPROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION. Against. Gerard Joseph MacDonald
PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION Citation: R v. MacDonald 2007 PESCTD 29 Date: 20070820 Docket: S1 GC-556 Registry: Charlottetown Between Her Majesty the Queen Against
More informationCRIMES CODE (18 PA.C.S.) AND JUDICIAL CODE (42 PA.C.S.) - OMNIBUS AMENDMENTS Act of Jul. 5, 2012, P.L. 880, No. 91 Cl. 18 Session of 2012 No.
HB 75 CRIMES CODE (18 PA.C.S.) AND JUDICIAL CODE (42 PA.C.S.) - OMNIBUS AMENDMENTS Act of Jul. 5, 2012, P.L. 880, No. 91 Cl. 18 Session of 2012 No. 2012-91 AN ACT Amending Titles 18 (Crimes and Offenses)
More informationThe Summary Offences Procedure Act, 1990
1 SUMMARY OFFENCES PROCEDURE, 1990 S-63.1 The Summary Offences Procedure Act, 1990 being Chapter S-63.1 of the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1990-91 (effective January 1, 1991) as amended by the Statutes of
More informationBill C-10: Criminal Code Amendments (Mental Disorder) NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE SECTION CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION
Bill C-10: Criminal Code Amendments (Mental Disorder) NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE SECTION CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION November 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS Bill C-10: Criminal Code Amendments (Mental Disorder) PREFACE...
More informationEMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICES ACT
Province of Alberta Statutes of Alberta, Current as of December 15, 2017 Office Consolidation Published by Alberta Queen s Printer Alberta Queen s Printer Suite 700, Park Plaza 10611-98 Avenue Edmonton,
More informationQueensland DOMESTIC VIOLENCE (FAMILY PROTECTION) AMENDMENT ACT 1992
Queensland DOMESTIC VIOLENCE (FAMILY PROTECTION) AMENDMENT ACT 1992 Act No. 46 of 1992 Queensland DOMESTIC VIOLENCE (FAMILY PROTECTION) AMENDMENT ACT 1992 Section TABLE OF PROVISIONS Page 1 Short title.....................................................
More informationSTATE OF MISSISSIPPI CRIME VICTIMS BILL OF RIGHTS REQUEST TO EXERCISE VICTIMS RIGHTS
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CRIME VICTIMS BILL OF RIGHTS REQUEST TO EXERCISE VICTIMS RIGHTS FOR VICTIM TO SIGN: I,, victim of the crime of, (victim) (crime committed) committed on, by in, (date) (name of offender,
More informationCriminal Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1967
ELIZABETH II c. 18 Criminal Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1967 1967 CHAPTER 18 An Act to abolish the division of crimes into felonies and misdemeanours, to amend and simplify the law in respect of matters
More information4. What is private law? 3. What are laws? 1. Review all terms in chapters: 1, 2, 4, 5,6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, What is the purpose of Law?
1. Review all terms in chapters: 1, 2, 4, 5,6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14 2. What is the purpose of Law? Laws reflect the values and beliefs of a society. A rule enforced by government 3. What are laws? 1)Set
More informationPROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN LESLIE CAMERON KING
PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION Citation: R. v. King 2008 PESCTD 18 Date: 20080325 Docket: S1-GC-572 Registry: Charlottetown BETWEEN: AND: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN LESLIE
More informationSTATE OF MISSISSIPPI CRIME VICTIMS BILL OF RIGHTS REQUEST TO EXERCISE VICTIMS RIGHTS
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CRIME VICTIMS BILL OF RIGHTS REQUEST TO EXERCISE VICTIMS RIGHTS FOR VICTIM TO SIGN: I,, victim of the crime of, (victim) (crime committed) committed on, by in, (date) (name of offender,
More informationTo obtain additional copies of this document, or to ask how to contact Victim Services in your area, contact:
October 2013 To obtain additional copies of this document, or to ask how to contact Victim Services in your area, contact: Victims Services Policy and Program Development Branch Alberta Justice and Solicitor
More informationPolicy of the Provincial Court of British Columbia
Information Regarding Bans on Publication Policy Effective Date: Policy Code: February 28, 2011 ACC-3 Scope of Application: Applies to Provincial Court of proceedings. Purpose of Policy To provide a general
More informationVIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY SESSION
VIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY -- 2015 SESSION CHAPTER 691 An Act to amend and reenact 9.1-902, 17.1-805, 18.2-46.1, 18.2-356, 18.2-357, 18.2-513, 19.2-215.1, and 19.2-386.35 of the Code of Virginia and to
More informationSASKATCHEWAN COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH RULES RESPECTING PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCES
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS 501 SASKATCHEWAN COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH RULES RESPECTING PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCES (SI/86-158, Canada Gazette (Part II), September 3, 1986.) 1 When an accused is to be tried with a jury,
More informationWild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act
WILD ANIMAL AND PLANT PROTECTION AND REGULATION 1 Revised Statutes of Canada Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act being Chapter W-8.5 (1992, c.52)
More informationHOUSE BILL NO. HB0094. Sponsored by: Joint Judiciary Interim Committee A BILL. for. AN ACT relating to criminal justice; amending provisions
0 STATE OF WYOMING LSO-0 HOUSE BILL NO. HB00 Criminal justice reform. Sponsored by: Joint Judiciary Interim Committee A BILL for AN ACT relating to criminal justice; amending provisions relating to sentencing,
More informationAssembly Bill No. 579 Select Committee on Corrections, Parole, and Probation
Assembly Bill No. 579 Select Committee on Corrections, Parole, and Probation CHAPTER... AN ACT relating to crimes; revising provisions relating to the registration of and community notification concerning
More informationPROTECTION AGAINST FAMILY VIOLENCE ACT
Province of Alberta PROTECTION AGAINST FAMILY VIOLENCE ACT Revised Statutes of Alberta 2000 Current as of March 30, 2018 Office Consolidation Published by Alberta Queen s Printer Alberta Queen s Printer
More informationCRIMINAL OFFENCES. Chapter 9
CRIMINAL OFFENCES Chapter 9 LEVELS OF OFFENCES In the Canadian legal system we have three levels of criminal offences. Summary Conviction Offences Indictable Offences Hybrid Offences LEVELS OF OFFENCES:
More informationCHAPTER 11:04 PROBATION OF OFFENDERS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
Probation of Offenders 3 CHAPTER 11:04 PROBATION OF OFFENDERS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION 1. Short title. 2. Application. 3. Interpretation. 4. Power of court to permit conditional release of offender.
More informationNO MEANS NO. Understanding Consent to Sexual Activity. Public Legal Education and Information Service of New Brunswick
NO MEANS NO Public Legal Education and Information Service of New Brunswick This pamphlet provides information on what is meant by the age of consent to sexual activity and an overview of Canada s laws
More information