Sentencing Factors Relating to the Offender: Difference between revisions

{{LevelZero}}{{HeaderPrinciples}}

{{seealso|Effect of Criminal Records in Sentencing|Notice of Increased Penalty#Proving Prior Record|Jump, Step and Gap Principles‎}}

Age is relevant to sentencing as a mitigating factor. A youthful person is seen as having a greater chance of reforming and maturing over time. The courts in certain cases recognize young adults as sometimes foolish, inexperienced, irresponsible, immature and have a "greater prospects for rehabilitation". This diminishes their level of responsibility and moral blameworthiness.<ref>eg see {{CanLIIR|Kunzig|fpg46|2011 MBPC 81 (CanLII)}}{{perMBPC|MJ Smith J}}{{atL|fpg46|54}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Scott|ggl3g|2015 ABCA 99 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtABCA}} (3:0){{atL|ggl3g|13}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Jackson|1db67|2002 CanLII 41524 (ON CA)|163 CCC (3d) 451 (Ont CA)}}{{perONCA|Sharpe JA}} (3:0)<br>

Likewise, the principle of restraint is a prominent factor for young offenders.<ref> See: {{CanLIIRP|Demeter and Whitmore|hv0z8|1976 CanLII 1413 (ON CA)|32 CCC (2d) 379 (Ont. C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Dubin JA}}</ref>

{{CanLIIR|Ijam|1svv8|2007 ONCA 597 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|MacPherson JA}}{{atsL|1svv8|55 to 56}}, 87 OR (3d) 81<br>

The factor becomes less important when the youthful offender has "considerable amount of experience in the criminal justice system, has been subject to various forms of probationary and correctional supervision, and has not only breached those conditions but has also re-offended".<ref>

{{CanLIIR|Nassri|ghhb3|2015 ONCA 316 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|Sharpe JA}} (3:0){{atL|ghhb3|30}}<br>

The "length of a penitentiary sentence for a youthful offender should rarely be determined solely by the objectives of denunciation and general deterrence".<ref>

e.g. {{CanLIIR|Wiens|fvz8j|2013 ABPC 15 (CanLII)}}{{perABPC|Pharo J}}{{atL|fvz8j|32}}<br>

At a certain age there is a recognized category of offender for which imprisonment would be considered "pointless or an unreasonable burden".<ref>

{{CanLIIR|Cromwell|1q355|2006 ABCA 365 (CanLII)}}{{perABCA|O’Brien JA}}{{atL|1q355|16}}<br>

see also {{CanLIIR|Schmitt|g65j1|2014 ABCA 105 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtABCA}} (3:0)

{{CanLIIR|Odgers|1nvxg|2006 ABPC 163 (CanLII)}}{{perABPC|JDB McDonald J}}{{atL|1nvxg|29}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Walker|gw3zb|2016 ABQB 695 (CanLII)}}{{perABQB|Ackerl J}}{{atL|gw3zb|74}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Nash|29vmr|2009 NBCA 7 (CanLII)|240 CCC (3d) 421 (N.B.C.A.)}}{{perNBCA|Robertson JA}} (3:0){{atL|29vmr|40}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Cormier|1lrhf|1999 CanLII 13118 (NB CA)|140 CCC (3d) 87 (N.B.C.A.)}}{{perNBCA|Larlee JA}}<Br>

See {{CanLIIRP|Kakekagamick|1p52k|2006 CanLII 28549 (ONCA)|[2006] 81 OR (3d) 664, 211 CCC (3d) 289 (CA)}}{{perONCA|Laforme JA}} (3:0){{atL|1p52k|73}} ("[his] failure to accept responsibility for his actions weighs against affording him significant consideration by way of mitigation")<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Valentini|1f979|1999 CanLII 1885 (ON CA)|132 CCC (3d) 262, 43 OR (3d) 178 (CA)}}{{atsL||82| to 83}}<br>

See also {{CanLIIRP|Kozy|1p78m|1990 CanLII 2625 (ONCA)|58 CCC (3d) 500 (Ont.C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Carthy JA}} (3:0){{Atps|505-506}}<br>  

{{CanLIIRP|Valentini|1f979|1999 CanLII 1885 (ONCA)|132 CCC (3d) 262 (Ont.C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Rosenberg JA}} (3:0){{atsL|1f979|80| to 85}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Arcand|2dnsp|2010 ABCA 363 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtABCA}}{{atL|2dnsp|293}}</ref>

{{CanLIIR|Proulx|527b|2000 SCC 5 (CanLII)}}{{perSCC|Lamer CJ}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|KA|1f9kj|1999 CanLII 3756 (ON CA)|[1999] OJ No 2640 (Ont. C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Rosenberg JA}}{{atL|1f9kj|49}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Cormier|1lrhf|1999 CanLII 13118 (NB CA)|140 CCC (3d) 87 (N.B.C.A.)}}{{perNBCA|Larlee JA}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Hawkins|2fdkz|2011 NSCA 7 (CanLII)}}{{perNSCA|Beveridge JA}}{{atsL|2fdkz|31| to 34}}<br>

see also: {{CanLIIR|Henry|4v1h|2002 NSCA 33 (CanLII)}}{{perNSCA|Roscoe JA}}{{atL|4v1h|21}}<br>  

{{CanLIIR|Zeek|1g8gw|2004 BCCA 42 (CanLII)}}{{perBCCA|Rowles JA}}<br>

An offender who "continues to maintain his innocence" cannot be found by that fact alone to lack "remorse or insight".<ref>

{{CanLIIR|Yau|2fs0d|2011 ONSC 1009 (CanLII)}}{{perONSC|MacDonnell J}}{{atL|2fs0d|27}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Giroux|1n06n|2006 CanLII 10736 (ON CA)|207 CCC (3d) 512 (Ont. C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Blair JA}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|B(C)|1z164|2008 ONCA 486 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|Gillese JA}} (3:0)<br>

Remorse has little importance when the case is so strong that "guilt is inevitable".<ref>

{{CanLIIR|Singh|hsm3k|2018 ONSC 3850 (CanLII)}}{{perONSC|Harris J}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Faulds|6k6m|1994 CanLII 770 (ON CA)|, 20 OR (3d) 13 (Ont. C.A.)}}{{TheCourtONCA}}{{atL|6k6m|14}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Daya|1t671|2007 ONCA 693 (CanLII)|227 CCC (3d) 367 (Ont. C.A.)}}{{perONCA|Moldaver and LaForme JJA}}{{atL|1t671|15}}<br>

Where there is misconduct on the part of the accused during the course of proceedings, it will be "much more difficult to perceive the existence of remorse".<ref>

{{CanLIIRP|Sawchyn|fp6pw|1981 ABCA 173 (CanLII)|, 124 DLR (3d) 600 (Alta C.A.)}}{{perABCA|Laycraft JA}}{{atL|fp6pw|34}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Nyoni|hms13|2017 BCCA 360 (CanLII)}}{{perBCCA|Newbury JA}}{{atL|hms13|8}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Suter|hsrl|2018 SCC 34 (CanLII)|[2018] 2 SCR 496}}{{atL|hsrlt|64}} ("This is because offenders who honestly but mistakenly believe in the lawfulness of their actions are less morally blameworthy than offenders who — in committing the same offence — are unsure about the lawfulness of their actions, or know that their actions are unlawful.")<br>

{{CanLIIR|Morency|fx1st|2012 QCCQ 4556 (CanLII)}}{{perQCCQ|Morand J}}{{atL|fx1st|85}}<br>

{{CanLIIRC|Quintin Vézina v R|2c1g9|2010 QCCA 1457 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtQCCA}}<Br>

{{CanLIIRP|Bogart|1cqs2|2002 CanLII 41073 (ON CA)|61 OR (3d) 75 (CA)}}{{perONCA|Laskin JA}} ( “[r]ecognized that the payment of full restitution before sentencing ‘might’ be a ‘special’ circumstance justifying a conditional sentence where a prison sentence is otherwise appropriate.” )<br>

{{CanLIIR|Mathur|h3tl0|2017 ONCA 403 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|Trotter JA}}<br>

A mitigating factor that may be considered is whether the offence is "out of character".

{{CanLIIR|McIntosh|fr25j|2012 ONCJ 216 (CanLII)}}{{perONCJ|Hearn J}}{{atL|fr25j|38}}</ref>

e.g. {{CanLIIR|Malt|gv7p2|2016 BCPC 322 (CanLII)}}{{perBCPC|Harris J}}{{atL|gv7p2|10}}<br>

e.g. {{CanLIIR|Patton|fm16n|2011 ABCA 199 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtABCA}}{{atL|fm16n|10}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Carelse|fvz5h|2013 SKQB 15 (CanLII)}}{{perSKQB|Danyliuk J}}{{atsL|fvz5h|28| to 30}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|SCW|j3f8t|2019 BCCA 405 (CanLII)}}{{perBCCA|Goepel JA}}{{atL|j3f8t|26}} (" should further note that even if it could be said that the judge erred in not giving weight to the opinion, it would likely have had no impact on the sentence. The fact that an accused is unlikely to re‑offend is not a significant consideration in a case concerning sexual abuse against children when the emphasis is properly based on matters of general deterrence and denunciation")

Efforts at rehabilitation and carerr advancement post-offence is a mitigating factor.<ref>

{{CanLIIRP|Thompson|2dr7g|1989 ABCA 212 (CanLII)|98 A.R. 348}}{{perABCA|Côté JA}}{{atL|2dr7g|4}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Spina|2dfmq|1997 ABCA 235 (CanLII)| (1997), 200 A.R. 133}}{{perABCA|Conrad JA}}{{atL|2dfmq|18}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Klok|g6vqx|2014 ABPC 102 (CanLII)}}{{perABPC|Allen J}}{{atsL|g6vqx|79| to 88}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Gryba|gr50j|2016 SKQB 123 (CanLII)}}{{perSKQB|Popescul CJ}}{{atL|gr50j|35}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Leroux|ghlc4|2015 SKCA 48 (CanLII)}}{{perSKCA|Caldwell JA}}{{atL|ghlc4|62}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Araya|gmdl1|2015 ONCA 854 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|Laskin JA}}{{atL|gmdl1|29}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Gwyn|299lr|2009 ABPC 212 (CanLII)}}{{perABPC|Fradsham J}}{{atL|299lr|16}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Deren|gx02p|2017 ABCA 23 (CanLII)}}{{perABCA|Rowbotham JA}}{{atL|gx02p|5}}<br>

 

 

 

 

cf. {{CanLIIRP|Breen|gbrz7|1982 CanLII 3889 (NL CA)|, 37 Nfld. & PEIR 472 (NLCA)}}{{perNLCA|Gushue JA}} (“the effect of alcohol or drugs” can be considered as mitigating factors in sentencing, “that consideration is normally confined to cases where the actions of a person are completely out of character. Thus, lenient treatment may be justified in anticipation of rehabilitation")<br>

Gambling addiction is not generally a mitigating factor.<ref>

{{CanLIIR|Holmes|5s4c|1999 ABCA 228 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtABCA}}<br>

cf. {{CanLIIR|Wilson|frb00|2012 NSPC 40 (CanLII)}}{{perNSPC|Ross J}}<br>

 

An offender with issues with substance abuse may be subject to probationary terms requiring them to abstain absolutely from the possession or consumption of the substances. However, some courts will take the view that such restrictions can be counter-productive where there is no belief that they will comply with the conditions.<ref>

{{CanLIIR|Warren|fstt4|2012 CanLII 54025 (NLPC)}}{{perNLPC|Gorman J}}{{atL|fstt4|58}}</ref>

 

{{CanLIIRx|Fuller|hmvq6|2017 ABCA 361 (CanLII)}}{{fix}}{{AtL||13}}<br>

==Mental Health==

{{CanLIIRP|Peters|1nc5q|2000 NFCA 55 (CanLII)|194 Nfld. & PEIR 184 (NLCA)}}{{perNLCA|Green JA}}, (“the mental illness of an offender will often be considered a mitigating factor in sentencing even though it is not of the sort that would establish a verdict of not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder at the time of the commission of the offence.”)</ref>

 

Reduction of sentences due to psychiatric grounds fall into two categories. The mental illness contributed to or caused the commission of the offence or the effect of imprisonment or penalty would be disproportionately sever because of the offender's condition.<ref>

 

 

Generally, for a mental illness is to be considered mitigating, the offender must show that there is a causal link between the condition and the criminal conduct.<ref>

{{CanLIIRP|Prioriello|fsklm|2012 ONCA 63 (CanLII)|288 OAC 198}}{{perONSC|O'Connor J}}{{atL||11}} ("In order for a mental illness to be considered as a mitigating factor in sentencing, the offender must show a causal link between his illness and his criminal conduct, that is, the illness is an underlying reason for his aberrant conduct")<Br>

 

The offender must show that a lengthy sentence would have a "severe negative effect on the offender such that it should be reduced on compassionate grounds".<ref>

 

{{CanLIIRP|Ayorech|fqjzl|2012 ABCA 82 (CanLII)|[2012] AJ No 236}}{{TheCourtABCA}}{{atL|fqjzl|10}} (“mental disorders, particularly schizophrenia, can significantly mitigate a sentence, even if the evidence does not disclose that the mental illness was the direct cause of the offence or that it was carried out during a period of delusions, hallucinations, or such.”)</ref>

This is also true where the offender was not suffering from delusions at the time.<ref>

{{CanLIIRP|Resler|flrdq|2011 ABCA 167 (CanLII)|95 WCB (2d) 165}}{{TheCourtABCA}} (3:0)<br>

{{ibid1|Ayorech}}</ref>

{{supra1|Belcourt}}</ref>

 

{{CanLIIR-N|Hagendorf|, 2000 CarswellOnt 5245 (S.C.)}}{{perONSC|Durno J}}{{at-|50}}</ref>

 

{{CanLIIRP|Lundrigan|fs0sg|2012 NLCA 43 (CanLII)|[2012] NJ No 231 (NLCA)}}{{perNLCA|Rowe JA}}{{atL|fs0sg|20}}<br>

However, this is less so for serious offences.<ref>

see {{CanLIIR-N|JM|, [2008] NJ No 262 (P.C.)}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Taylor|fs56r|2012 CanLII 42053 (NLPC)|[2012] NJ No 251 (P.C.)}}{{perNLPC|Mennie J}}<br>

 

see {{CanLIIRP|Valiquette|1phqx|1990 CanLII 3048|60 CCC (3d) 325}}{{perQCCA|Rothman JA}}{{atp|331}} (“most people understand that the mentally ill require treatment and supervision, not punishment”)</ref>

 

 

{{CanLIIR|Batisse|22cd6|2009 ONCA 114 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|Gillese JA}}<br>

However, at times mental illness will be considered an aggravating factor that will increase sentence where it is necessary to protect the public from a dangerous persons who has committed a dangerous offence.<ref>

{{CanLIIRP|Lockyer|1nc5p|2000 NLCA 59 (CanLII)|[2000] NJ No 306 (NLCA)}}{{perNLCA|Roberts JA}} (2:1)</ref>

Mental illness reduces the importance of denunciation and deterrence and increases the importance of treatment. This includes situations where rehabilitation or cure is impossible.<ref>

{{CanLIIR-N|Hiltermann|, [1993] AJ No 609 (CA)}}{{ats-|4-8}}</ref>

 

It is suggested it should be given little if any weight since the punishing of the offender will not make an example to others by way of general deterrence.<ref>

{{CanLIIRP|Newby|2dth0|1991 ABCA 307 (CanLII)|, 84 Alta. L.R. (2d) 127}}{{perABCA|Foisy JA}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Rhyno|2694m|2009 NSCA 108 (CanLII)}}{{perNSCA|Oland JA}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Dickson|1tsdq|2007 BCCA 561 (CanLII)|228 CCC (3d) 450}}{{perBCCA|Finch CJ}} (3:0)<br>

The mental condition will attenuate the relative importance of deterrence and denunciation.<ref>

{{CanLIIR|Tremblay|1p97b|2006 ABCA 252 (CanLII)}}{{perABCA|Martin JA}}{{atL|1p97b|7}}<br>

{{CanLIIR|Resler|flrdq|2011 ABCA 167 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtABCA}} (3:0){{atL|flrdq|14}}<br>

A mental illness diminishes the offender’s degree of responsibility.<ref>

{{CanLIIR|Resler|flrdq|2011 ABCA 167 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtABCA}}{{atsL|flrdq|9| to 10}}, {{atsL-np|flrdq|16|}}<br>

 

Incarceration of persons with mental health issues can create a disproportionate impact upon them, which can be a mitigating factor.<ref>

 

{{supra1|Ayorech}} at 13  (“Ayorech’s mental disorders have left him vulnerable, such that Dr. Santana opined that he ‘was ill equipped to survive in the prison system.’")</ref>

 

While it has also been observed that the managing of mental health issues and other medical factors are best handled by correctional authorities who are obligated to provide essential health care including mental health care.<Ref>

{{CanLIIRP|CF|jb5zd|2020 ONSC 5975 (CanLII)}}{{perONSC|Leibovich J}}{{atL|jb5zd|57}}<Br>

{{CanLIIRP|Shahnawaz|1fbgv|2000 CanLII 16973 (ON CA)|149 CCC (3d) 97}}{{perONCA|Charron JA}} (2:1){{AtsL|1fbgv|30| to 34}}<br>

{{supra1|Prioriello}}

 

It is recognized that it is "difficult" to predict the mental health condition of persons in custody.<ref>

{{ibid1|Shahnawaz}}{{atL|1fbgv|34}}

 

{{CanLIIR|H(MJ)|1jjnk|2004 SKCA 171 (CanLII)}}{{perSKCA|Richards JA}} (3:0)

</ref>

 

The cognitive deficit from Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) results in limited restraints as well as an appreciation of the immorality of their actions. This reduces the impact on deterrence and denunciation and increases the mitigation on sentence.<ref>  

{{CanLIIR|Ramsay|fsl7t|2012 ABCA 257 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtABCA}} (3:0)</ref>

 

{{CanLIIR|Adamo|g0ptp|2013 MBQB 225 (CanLII)}}{{perMBQB|Suche J}}<br>

{{supra1|Ayorech}} <Br>

It has been observed that the purposes and principles of sentencing are "sufficiently broad and flexible to enable a sentencing court in appropriate cases to consider both the systemic and background factors that may have played a role in the commission of the offence and the values of the community from which the offender comes".<ref>

{{CanLIIR|Borde|1c062|2003 CanLII 4187 (ON CA)}}{{perONCA|Rosenberg JA}}<Br>

{{CanLIIR|Rage|hqqpx|2018 ONCA 211 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtONCA}} (3:0){{atL|hqqpx|13}}<br>

Cultural and customary differences cannot be considered mitigating where it involves offences of violence or offences of a sexual nature.<ref>

{{CanLIIR|Brown|1p6kf|1992 CanLII 2829 (AB CA)}}{{TheCourtABCA}}<br>

However, a lack of facility with English has been treated as mitigating in certain circumstances.<ref>

{{CanLIIR|JWS|fvtb6|2013 NSPC 7 (CanLII)}}{{perNSPC|Derrick J}}{{atL|fvtb6|41}}<br>

{{CanLIIRP|Michel|1wnsq|1996 CanLII 8363 (BCCA)| (1996), 133 WAC 237 (BCCA)}}{{perBCCA|Proudfoot JA}}</ref>  

{{CanLIIRP|Shah|1dcv9|1994 CanLII 1290 (1994)|94 CCC 45 (BCCA)}}{{perBCCA|Finch JA}} (2:1)<br>  

In some cases, sympathy for family members of the accused may be relevant. But it should not "override all other of the considerations for sentencing".<ref>

{{CanLIIR|Schmitt|g65j1|2014 ABCA 105 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtABCA}} (3:0){{atL|g65j1|11}}<br>

==Effect on Family and Others==

{{CanLIIR|Schmitt|g65j1|2014 ABCA 105 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtABCA}} (3:0)

 

 

==Effect on Immigration==

| [http://canlii.ca/t/7vwq#sec64 IRPA]

 

; Risk of Deportation as Factor

The risk of deportation can be a factor to consider sentencing. <ref>

{{CanLIIRP|Koc|1x3vx|2008 NLTD 97 (CanLII)|[2008] NJ No 161 (N.L.S.C.T.D.)}}{{perNLSC|Goulding J}}<br>

{{CanLIIR-N|BRC|, [2010] OJ No 3571 (Ont. C.A.)}} at 6<br>

 

 

 

 

The risk of deportation is a "legitimate consideration for a sentencing judge" however "cannot be used to justify an otherwise unfit sentence" even where the offender has "virtually no connection" with the other country.<ref>

 

 

 

 

=="Collateral Consequences" of Commission of the Offence==

 

 

 

 

Collateral consequences upon the offender, including being victim of vigilante justice, forms part of the offender's personal circumstances and should be taken into account on sentencing.<ref>

 

 

After mitigating effects arising from collateral consequences are applied the sentence must still conform with the principle of proportionality.<ref>

 

 

===Victimization of Accused During Proceedings===

An incarcerated offender who is attacked by fellow inmates can be taken as a collateral factor.<ref>