Weapons Offences (Sentencing Cases): Difference between revisions
m 1 revision imported |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 173: | Line 173: | ||
[22] In R. v. Foley, 2017 NLTD(G) 86, Handrigan, J. imposed a sentence of four years following conviction for aggravated assault (s. 268). The injuries were stab wounds and the victim nearly died. The offender had a prior criminal record. At paragrpah 53, after reviewing several sentencing decisions which involved stabbings, Handrigan, J. commented that the “range of sentence for aggravated assault is two years to six years' imprisonment.” The sentencing decisions reviewed by Handrigan, J. did not involve use of a firearm. The range of sentence for an aggravated assault that involves discharge of a firearm is higher, with the low end at five years. | [22] In R. v. Foley, 2017 NLTD(G) 86, Handrigan, J. imposed a sentence of four years following conviction for aggravated assault (s. 268). The injuries were stab wounds and the victim nearly died. The offender had a prior criminal record. At paragrpah 53, after reviewing several sentencing decisions which involved stabbings, Handrigan, J. commented that the “range of sentence for aggravated assault is two years to six years' imprisonment.” The sentencing decisions reviewed by Handrigan, J. did not involve use of a firearm. The range of sentence for an aggravated assault that involves discharge of a firearm is higher, with the low end at five years. | ||
[23] In R. v. Bellissimo, 2009 ONCA 49 (CanLII) the offender fired several shots inside a public restaurant, injuring two patrons. The relevant sections of the Criminal Code are not referenced, but the facts have several similarities to those involving Mr. Marsh. One may reasonably assume that the charges included aggravated assault (s. 268) and discharge of a firearm with intent to wound (s. 244). The court stated that “the range of sentence for these kinds of serious gun-related offences is between seven and eleven years.” I agree with the upper end of that range. | [23] In R. v. Bellissimo, [http://canlii.ca/t/225g6 2009 ONCA 49] (CanLII) the offender fired several shots inside a public restaurant, injuring two patrons. The relevant sections of the Criminal Code are not referenced, but the facts have several similarities to those involving Mr. Marsh. One may reasonably assume that the charges included aggravated assault (s. 268) and discharge of a firearm with intent to wound (s. 244). The court stated that “the range of sentence for these kinds of serious gun-related offences is between seven and eleven years.” I agree with the upper end of that range. | ||
[24] In R. v. Walker-King, 2011 ONSC 4307 (CanLII) the twenty-year-old offender went to a private residence with a loaded handgun, and shot the victim in the abdomen. He had a prior record as a young offender. The sentence was 9.5 years broken down as follows: aggravated assault (s. 268), eight years; discharge of firearm with intent to wound (s. 244), seven years concurrent; breach of recognizance (s. 145(3)), one year; and wearing disguise, six months. These are similar facts and circumstances, and a comparable sentence for Mr. Marsh’s s. 244 and s. 268 offences should be close to seven years for each incident. | [24] In R. v. Walker-King, [http://canlii.ca/t/fm4pg 2011 ONSC 4307] (CanLII) the twenty-year-old offender went to a private residence with a loaded handgun, and shot the victim in the abdomen. He had a prior record as a young offender. The sentence was 9.5 years broken down as follows: aggravated assault (s. 268), eight years; discharge of firearm with intent to wound (s. 244), seven years concurrent; breach of recognizance (s. 145(3)), one year; and wearing disguise, six months. These are similar facts and circumstances, and a comparable sentence for Mr. Marsh’s s. 244 and s. 268 offences should be close to seven years for each incident. | ||
[25] In R. v. Chan, 2011 NSSC 471 (CanLII) the offender, who had a prior criminal record, was sentenced to eleven years following convictions for two separate gun-related incidents. In the first incident the offender went into a shop and fired a Glock 9 mm handgun three times in the direction of the intended victim. The motive for the crime was to settle an altercation. The second incident involved unauthorized possession of a firearm, but it was not fired or aimed at anyone. The sentence breakdown for each individual crime is not relevant here because the sections of the Criminal Code that were engaged are mostly different, and because the totality principle was used to reduce the overall sentence. However, it is helpful and comparable to note that a seven-year sentence was imposed for the discharge of firearm with intent to wound (s. 244) and that the total sentence for the two gun-related incidents was eleven years. In order to achieve parity, we are looking at something close to seven years for the s. 244 offence, and something close to 11 years for the total sentence. | [25] In R. v. Chan, [http://canlii.ca/t/fpj3p 2011 NSSC 471] (CanLII) the offender, who had a prior criminal record, was sentenced to eleven years following convictions for two separate gun-related incidents. In the first incident the offender went into a shop and fired a Glock 9 mm handgun three times in the direction of the intended victim. The motive for the crime was to settle an altercation. The second incident involved unauthorized possession of a firearm, but it was not fired or aimed at anyone. The sentence breakdown for each individual crime is not relevant here because the sections of the Criminal Code that were engaged are mostly different, and because the totality principle was used to reduce the overall sentence. However, it is helpful and comparable to note that a seven-year sentence was imposed for the discharge of firearm with intent to wound (s. 244) and that the total sentence for the two gun-related incidents was eleven years. In order to achieve parity, we are looking at something close to seven years for the s. 244 offence, and something close to 11 years for the total sentence. | ||
[26] In R. v. Jones, 2012 ONCA 609 (CanLII), the offender was sentenced to ten years following convictions for aggravated assault, discharging a firearm with intent to wound, using a firearm while committing an indictable offence, kidnapping with a firearm, and possession of a restricted weapon. The facts involved a kidnapping which evolved into a confrontation in which gunfire was exchanged. One victim was hit in the crossfire and injured. The Court of Appeal upheld concurrent sentences of nine years for the aggravated assault (s. 268) and the discharge of firearm with intent to wound (s. 244). | [26] In R. v. Jones, [http://canlii.ca/t/fsqtm 2012 ONCA 609] (CanLII), the offender was sentenced to ten years following convictions for aggravated assault, discharging a firearm with intent to wound, using a firearm while committing an indictable offence, kidnapping with a firearm, and possession of a restricted weapon. The facts involved a kidnapping which evolved into a confrontation in which gunfire was exchanged. One victim was hit in the crossfire and injured. The Court of Appeal upheld concurrent sentences of nine years for the aggravated assault (s. 268) and the discharge of firearm with intent to wound (s. 244). | ||
[27] In R. v. Ghebreigziabiher, 2012 ONSC 5384 (CanLII), the offender, with a prior criminal record, was sentenced to nine years for aggravated assault (s. 268) and one year consecutive for possession of a firearm while prohibited by court order. He also received concurrent sentences of four years for discharging a firearm, two years for pointing a firearm and one year for possession of ammunition contrary to court order. | [27] In R. v. Ghebreigziabiher, [http://canlii.ca/t/fsz07 2012 ONSC 5384] (CanLII), the offender, with a prior criminal record, was sentenced to nine years for aggravated assault (s. 268) and one year consecutive for possession of a firearm while prohibited by court order. He also received concurrent sentences of four years for discharging a firearm, two years for pointing a firearm and one year for possession of ammunition contrary to court order. | ||
[28] In R. v. Alexander, 2013 ONSC 171 (CanLII), the 29-year-old offender was sentenced to six years, 11 and one-half months for discharging a firearm, reckless disregard of a firearm, unlawful possession of a firearm and magazine, possession while prohibited, and two counts of breach of recognizance. | [28] In R. v. Alexander, [http://canlii.ca/t/fx059 2013 ONSC 171] (CanLII), the 29-year-old offender was sentenced to six years, 11 and one-half months for discharging a firearm, reckless disregard of a firearm, unlawful possession of a firearm and magazine, possession while prohibited, and two counts of breach of recognizance. | ||
--> | --> | ||
Revision as of 20:44, 28 February 2018
- < Sentencing
- < Cases
Section 86: Careless Storage
| ||||||||
|}
Section 87: Pointing a Firearm
|}
Section 88: Dangerous Purpose
| ||||||||
|}
Section 95: Possession of a Restricted/Prohibited Firearm
Template:SCaseHeader Template:SCase1
|}
Section 90: Concealed Weapon
| ||||||||
|}
Section 99, 100: Weapons Trafficking
| ||||||||
|}
Section 103: Importing Weapons
Template:SCaseHeader Template:SCase1
|}
Possession of a Weapon Contrary to an Order (117.01)
| ||||||||
Template:SCaseHeader Template:SCase1
|}
Discharging a Firearm (s. 244)
| ||||||||
|}
See Also
| |||||