In a Crown sentence appeal arising from historical child sexual offences, the Court clarified that appellate intervention requires a legal error affecting sentence or demonstrable unfitness, and that sufficiency of reasons must be assessed functionally and contextually.
The Court held the sentencing judge’s factual findings and reasons were sufficient in light of the jury verdict, record, and submissions.
It further held that contemporary sentencing principles, including Friesen, apply to historical offences, subject to the maximum penalty in force when the offences were committed.
The appellate reduction was set aside, the original six-year concurrent sentence restored, and reincarceration ordered in the interests of denunciation and deterrence.
