Sentencing Outside the Range
Standard
for Intervention on an Appeal From a Sentence
Absent an error in principle, failure to consider a
relevant factor, or an overemphasis of the appropriate factors, a court of
appeal should only intervene to vary a sentence imposed at trial if the
sentence is demonstrably unfit. Parliament explicitly vested sentencing judges
with a discretion to determine the appropriate degree and kind of punishment
under the Criminal Code.
R.
v. M. (C.A.), [1996] 1 S.C.R. 500 at para. 90
Except where a sentencing judge makes an error of law
or an error in principle that has an impact on the sentence, an
appellate court may not vary the sentence unless it is demonstrably unfit.
R.
v. Lacasse, 2015 SCC 64, [2015] 3 S.C.R. 1089 at para 11.
Sentencing
Ranges
Sentencing ranges are
primarily guidelines, and not hard and fast rules: As a result, a deviation
from a sentencing range is not synonymous with an error of law or an error in
principle.
R.
v. Lacasse, at para 60; see also R. v. Nasogaluak, 2010 SCC 6, [2010] 1 S.C.R. 206 at para. 44
Sentencing ranges are nothing more than summaries of
the minimum and maximum sentences imposed in the past, which serve in any given
case as guides for the application of all the relevant principles and
objectives. However, they should not be considered “averages”, let alone
straitjackets, but should instead be seen as historical portraits for the use
of sentencing judges, who must still exercise their discretion in each case.
There will always be situations that call for a
sentence outside a particular range: although ensuring parity in sentencing is
in itself a desirable objective, the fact that each crime is committed in
unique circumstances by an offender with a unique profile cannot be
disregarded. The determination of a just and appropriate sentence is a highly
individualized exercise that goes beyond a purely mathematical calculation. It
involves a variety of factors that are difficult to define with precision. This
is why it may happen that a sentence that, on its face, falls outside a
particular range, and that may never have been imposed in the past for a
similar crime, is not demonstrably unfit. Once again, everything depends on the
gravity of the offence, the offender’s degree of responsibility and the
specific circumstances of each case.
R. v. Lacasse, at paras
57, 58
Comments
Post a Comment