Sexual Assault-related Offences (Youth Sentencing Cases)
(Redirected from Child Pornography (Youth Sentencing Cases))
| This page was last substantively updated or reviewed June 2025. (Rev. # 99573) |
- < Sentencing
- < Cases
Cases concerning Sentencing Young Persons.
Digests
| Case Name | Prov. | Crt. | Offence(s) | Sentence | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R v KB, 2025 ABCJ 102 (CanLII) per Ho J | AB | PC | 6 month CS (4 closed, 2 open) + 12 mo probation | The young person was 17 years-old. The victim was 15. Vaginal intercourse. | |
| R v DS, 2025 ONCJ 169 (CanLII), per March J | ON | PC | 6 month DCSO | ||
| R v SA, 2024 ONCJ 663 (CanLII) | ON | CJ | 2 years probation | Offender was 22 years old at the time of sentencing. | |
| R v QM, 2024 ABCA 221 (CanLII) | AB | CA | sexual assault | 15 months’ probation | The Offender had anal intercourse with a 15-year-old while she was asleep. He was 17-years-old at the time. Offender was 21 years old at the time of sentencing. |
| R v KL, 2023 ABCJ 180 (CanLII), per Fraser J | AB | CJ | 2 years probation | "The Offender, aged between 14 and 16 at the time, sexually assaulted his sister, aged between 6 and 7, over a period of 16 months from June 2016 to September 2017. The assaults occurred in the basement bedroom of their residence, where the Offender engaged in non-consensual sexual activities with the victim, including touching and penetration. The victim was instructed not to disclose the abuse (paras 1-4)." | |
| R v AB, 2023 ABPC 69 (CanLII), per De Souza J | AB | PC | sexual assault | 4 months open custody + 2 mo supervision + 6 months probation. | 16-year-old offender. 12-year-old victim. Vaginal and digital penetration. Masturbation. |
| R v PE, 2023 ABCJ 170 (CanLII), per Hancock J | AB | CJ | {{{6}}} | ||
| R v HL, 2022 BCPC 277 (CanLII), per Wolf J | BC | PC | sexual assault | 90 days custody + 18 probation with ISSO | 13-year-old victim |
| R v XJ, 2022 NSPC 27 (CanLII) | NS | PC | 16 months CS + 8 months Comm. | Appealed successfully on other grounds at [jzc9c 2023 NSCA 52 (CanLII)] | |
| R v MM, 2022 NSCA 46 (CanLII) | NS | CA | sexual assault | 12-months probation | Intercourse with victim while sleeping.15-year-old victim. |
| R v LP, 2022 ONCJ 403 (CanLII), per West J | ON | PC | 6 months CS (4 open + 2 comm.) + 18 months probation | intercourse on single meet up | |
| R v IA, 2022 ONCJ 490 (CanLII), per Monahan J | ON | CJ | 225 days CS (150 open + 75 comm) + 12 months probation | ||
| R v JK, 2022 ABPC 84 (CanLII), per Mah J | AB | PC | 24 month probation | "JK was charged under section 151 with sexual interference involving a sister 3 ½ years younger, which took place over a period of years from when JK was 12 until he was 18. The Crown requested a custodial sentence of 12 months followed by 12 months probation. Defence argued for a probation period of 18 to 24 months. The Court ordered a 24-month term of probation. In arriving at that decision the Court reviewed the question of whether deferred custody was available. Given that Section 42(5) of the YCJA curtails the use of Deferred Custody in a case of serious bodily harm. The Court then found that sexual assault constituted serious bodily harm and therefore precluded Deferred Custody. The question then became – does that infer a more onerous sentence. The Court concluded that was not required in all circumstances and that “exceptional circumstances” could lead to a less onerous sentence. Finding that JK was less morally culpable due to his specific upbringing, his cognitive limitations and the section 34 report opinion that his sexual offending was less predatory and more relating to lack of boundaries provided those exceptional circumstances." | |
| R v RS, 2022 ONCA 123 (CanLII), per curiam | ON | CA | 12 months open custody, 6 months supervision | "the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld a sentence of 12 months open custody and six-months supervision in a sex assault case. There were two victims in that case. The sex assaults involved anal intercourse involving a 15-year-old female victim and forced oral sex and anal intercourse involving a 14-year-old female victim." | |
| R v CZ, 2021 BCPC 25 (CanLII), per Doulis J | BC | PC | 24-month probation | "a 16 year old defendant was found to have sexually assaulted a 14-year-old. ... The defendant was indigenous and suffered from numerous disorders including fetal alcohol spectrum disorder. After a trial, both the Crown and the defence urged the court to impose a 24 month probationary sentence which the court did impose." [1] | |
| R v AW, 2021 ABPC 14 (CanLII), per Airth J | AB | PC | sexual interference | 2 years probation | intercourse "the young person pleaded guilty and acknowledged the harm he caused, a s. 34 Report was prepared. The youth had a troubled upbringing, he himself was a victim of sexual abuse and because of his age when the sentence was imposed he would have served a custodial sentence in an adult jail. It was only as a result of the final two considerations that the sentencing judge found a non-custodial sentence was justified." |
| R v KMF, 2021 ABPC 300 (CanLII) | AB | PC | 2 years probation | "the Court imposed a sentence of 2 years probation including a condition of 240 hours of community service. In that situation the charges were conspiracy to commit and attempting to commit sexual assault. A scheme was planned to attract the complainant to a residence where she would be sexually assaulted. The plan was put into effect but was not likely to be successful and in fact did not succeed. The Court determined there was some degree of remorse and there were “collateral community consequences”, family support and a low risk to reoffend. The sexual assault did not succeed – but the plan was without question an intention to engage in sexual intercourse without the consent of the victim as part of a game to determine how long he could continue after she removed her consent." | |
| R v MA, 2020 SKPC 13 (CanLII), per Kovatch J | SK | PC | 15 mo open custody | ||
| R v PM, 2020 CanLII 42278 (NL PC), per Gorman J | NL | PC | 12 mo probation | ||
| R v BRS, 2020 ABCA 29 (CanLII) | AB | CA | 6 months C&S + probation | "the Court of Appeal overturned a sentence of 2 years probation, finding that: “This was a major sexual assault with evidence of planning and serious consequences. A fit and proper sentence in these circumstances would have been a custody and supervision order of 15 months”. The Court imposed a sentence of 6 months Custody and Supervision taking into account that 9 months of the probation order had already been served. That case is perhaps the most analogous to the case at bar in that it involved the complainant being invited to the home of BRS for lunch and then being assaulted. The appeal court reviewed the information provided in the Victim Impact Statement and found that it could accept that information in coming to a determination that the complainant suffered severe psychological harm. It found that the trial judge had not appreciated the significance of the harm or taken it into account as an aggravating factor." | |
| R v JS, 2019 ONCJ 873 (CanLII), per Berg J | ON | PC | probation | "the court imposed a probationary sentence in a case involving incest from over 25 years earlier. The defendant was now an adult serving an adult sentence in a penitentiary for “similar offences”." [2] | |
| R v JRS, 2019 ONCA 852 (CanLII) | ON  |
CA | 12 months CS | "the Court of Appeal dealt with a sexual assault case that involved anal and vaginal penetration. The Court of Appeal found that the imposition of a deferred custody order by the trial judge had resulted in an illegal sentence as serious bodily harm had occurred. The Court of Appeal held that that an appropriate sentence would have been 12 months custody and supervision but given the sentence already served imposed a 6 months and nine day custody and supervision order with two months being served in the community." | |
| R v AY, 2019 ABPC 325 (CanLII), per Tousignant J | AB | PC | 2 years probation | "a 17-year-old Indigenous Young Person found guilty of a sexual assault. His early childhood was troubled with significant instability and multiple caregivers, but he was greatly supported by his Grandmother. The Young Person had a diagnosis of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) with mild intellectual disability. The Young Person was remorseful with his post-offence conduct “exemplary”. Sentence imposed: Two years’ Probation and 50 Community Service Hours." | |
| R v GDP, 2018 ABPC 278 (CanLII) | AB | PC | {{{6}}} | ||
| R v PR, 2018 SKCA 27 (CanLII), per Herauf JA | SK | CA | 12 mo probation | 11-year-old niece | |
| R v MMO, 2017 BCPC 78 (CanLII), per Challenger J | BC | PC | sex assault | discharge + 12 mo Prob. | |
| R v JS, 2017 YKTC 23 (CanLII), per Cozens J | YK | SC | 9 month CS (2/3 closed, 1/3 open) + 18 months probation | ||
| R v PEL, 2017 BCCA 215 (CanLII), per Fitch JA | BC | CA | 60 days open, 30 days Comm. | historical assault | |
| R v GD-D, 2017 CanLII 26684 (ON CJ) | ON | CJ | {{{6}}} | ||
| R v J.B, 2017 ONCJ 542 (CanLII), per Wakefield J | ON | PC | 8 months open custody | "this court imposed a sentence of eight months open custody and four months community service for a sexual assault and forcible confinement. The sexual assault in that case involved non-consensual intercourse by a defendant who was just short of his 18th birthday. The complainant’s age is not clear from the reported decisions. Both the complainant and the defendant were under the influence of alcohol." | |
| R v DB, 2016 ABPC 23 (CanLII), per Tousignant J | AB | PC | 6 mo DCS, 9 mo prob | ||
| R v ETM, 2016 ABPC 43 (CanLII), per Redman J | AB | PC | conditional discharge | ||
| R v JAH, 2016 MBCA 58 (CanLII), per Chartier and Monnin JJA | MB | CA | 3-years probation | "the Manitoba Court of Appeal dealt with a young offender who committed major sexual assaults on five young children. The court found that a deferred custody order was not legally available but imposed a three-year probationary sentence, largely due to the fact that the defendant was enrolled in a residential program for sex offenders (see para 35 and following). In effect, the defendant was in a highly supervised program which was similar to a conditional sentence in an adult context." [3] | |
| R v X, 2016 CanLII 81303 (NL PC), per Gorman J | NL  |
PC | child pornography | 18 months probation | |
| R v BMS, 2016 NSCA 35 (CanLII), per curiam | NS  |
CA | child pornography | 18 months probation | |
| R v JR, 2016 ABPC 265 (CanLII) | AB | PC | |||
| R v RJDB, 2015 YKTC 16 (CanLII), per Chisholm J | YK | TC | 24 mo probation | ||
| R v NC, 2015 SKPC 79 (CanLII), per Daunt J | SK | PC | interference | 18 mo probation | 6-year-old victim |
| R v JB, 2015 CanLII 56998 (NL PC), per Skanes J | NL | PC | probation | 6 year old cousin | |
| R v NE et al, 2015 ONCJ 767 (CanLII), per Baker J | ON | PC | 18 months open custody and supervision | ||
| R v NG, 2015 MBCA 81 (CanLII), per Cameron JA | MB  |
CA | child pornography | 12 months C&S, 6 months DC | |
| R v SCL, 2014 BCCA 336 (CanLII), per D Smith J | BC | CA | CS | ||
| R v MR, 2014 ONCA 484 (CanLII) | ON | CA | 200 days closed, 100 days open. | "The Ontario Court of Appeal upheld a sentence of 200 days in secure custody and 100 days of 'community service', which I understand to be the supervision portion of the sentence to be served in the community. The sexual assault in that case was by a 16-year-old male and involved a 15-year-old female complainant. It involved non-consensual oral sex and anal sex. The defendant had, subsequent to the sexual assault, tried to paint the conduct as consensual, and he tried to force the complainant into silence. The trial judge said that probation alone would not address the needs of rehabilitation, reintegration, specific deterrence and denunciation. The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge made no error in principle." | |
| R v SB, 2014 BCPC 279 (CanLII), per Dickey J | BC  |
PC | child pornography | discharge | |
| R v AA, 2013 BCCA 202 (CanLII), per Harris JA | BC | CA | 6 mo CS with 2 year ISSP | ||
| R v TB, 2013 ONCA 675 (CanLII) | ON | CA | "the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld a sentence of 12 months closed custody and supervision order and 12 months probation on a charge of sexual interference. The 17-year-old defendant had groped a 13-year-old complainant between her legs and grabbed her breasts. The victim was a total stranger. The defendant suffered from a severe conduct disorder that could lead to antisocial personality disorder as an adult. The Court of Appeal stated at paragraph 8 that “it is doubtful that any lesser disposition would have been effective in holding the appellant accountable while at the same time promoting his rehabilitation and reintegration into society as required by section 38 (1) of the Act”." | ||
| R v BDL, 2013 SKQB 355 (CanLII), per Danyliuk J | SK | SC | 18 months probation | ||
| R v M(P), 2013 ONCJ 36 (CanLII), per Bishop J | ON | PC | Sexual Assault, Manslaughter | 1 year SC + 1 year DC + 1 year S | sexually assaulted a semi-incapacitated girl while outside drinking. Left the girl out in the slow and she froze to death. |
| R v JL, 2013 BCPC 347 (CanLII), per MacCarthy J | BC | PC | sexual assault causing bodily harm | 22 months CSO and 2 mo ISSP | |
| R v KO, 2012 NLCA 55 (CanLII), per Wells JA | NL | CA | |||
| R v A(D), 2011 ONCJ 748 (CanLII) | ON | PC | |||
| R v JLW, 2011 ABPC 368 (CanLII), per McLellan J | AB | PC | sexual assault | ||
| R v LSJPA — 1153}, 2011 QCCQ 13550 (CanLII) | QC | CQ | sexual assault, luring | CS | |
| R v JK, 2011 NWTTC 11 (CanLII), per Gorin J | NWT | TC | 6 mo CS + 12 mo prob | ||
| R v DBV, 2011 BCSC 1350 (CanLII), per Joyce J | BC | SC | sexual assault | 18 mo IRCS + 12 mo CSC | "the young indigenous offender was 14 at the time of the offence and the victim was the 9 year old playmate of his younger sister. DBV inserted his fingers in the girl’s vagina, causing a two inch tear to her vagina and significant blood loss. She required surgical intervention involving six to eight stitches. DBV was charged with aggravated sexual assault on the victim. Justice Joyce found DBV’s very young age and lack of record mitigating. He noted that the principles in play when sentencing an adult sex offender are not the same as when sentencing a youth. Specifically, the principles of denunciation and general and specific deterrence were not principles of sentencing under the YCJA then in force: ...Justice Joyce imposed a sentence of 18 months’ intensive rehabilitative custody and supervision order pursuant to s. 42(2)(2)(r) of the YCJA." |
| R v KO, 2011 CanLII 57233 (NL PC), per Gorman J | NL | PC | {{{6}}} | ||
| R v CVS, 2010 BCPC 71 (CanLII), per Frame J | BC | PC | |||
| R v L(J), 2010 ONCJ 453 (CanLII) | ON | CJ | affirmed at 2012 NLCA 55 | ||
| R v B(A), 2010 ONCJ 186 (CanLII) | ON | CJ | "the Court imposed a 6 month custody and supervision order with 4 months being in open custody and 2 months under supervision in the community. The case involved vaginal penetration with the defendant’s fingers and penis although no ejaculation. The defendant was 16 years old and had no record and the complainant was 14 years old. The trial judge said that she was impressed with the supports the defendant had in the community and his accomplishments." | ||
| R v K(PK), 2006 ABCA 1 (CanLII) | AB | CA | |||