The appellant sought leave to appeal sentence from a youth disposition imposing a conditional discharge and probation rather than an absolute discharge.
The court held there was no error in the sentencing judge's choice of disposition and no misapprehension of the distinction between absolute and conditional discharge.
It also rejected the argument that the dispositions were inconsistent under the non-disclosure provisions of the Young Offenders Act, holding that the relevant three-year period ran from the date of the finding of guilt and disposition, both of which occurred on the same date.
Leave to appeal sentence was granted, but the appeal was dismissed.
