The accused was convicted of sexual interference and sexual assault against a seven-year-old child, and pleaded guilty to a breach of recognizance.
The Crown sought a stay of the sexual interference count and advocated for an 8-10 month jail sentence.
Defence counsel challenged the constitutionality of the mandatory minimum six-month jail sentence for sexual assault of a person under 16 as cruel and unusual punishment.
The court found the mandatory minimum violated section 12 of the Charter and was not justified under section 1.
The court imposed a suspended sentence with three years probation, a five-year section 161 order, a 10-year SOIRA order, and a DNA order, finding that less restrictive sanctions were appropriate given the offender's circumstances, including his age, cognitive limitations, lack of criminal record, and housing stability.
