This appeal concerned the proper sentencing approach under the Young Offenders Act for a youth convicted of multiple break, enter and theft offences and breach of probation, against a background of a significant prior record and severe family dysfunction.
The Court held that s. 3 of the Act is a substantive declaration of principle requiring a balance between accountability, protection of society, and the special needs and guidance required by young persons.
It held that home circumstances may properly inform disposition, proportionality has a different and less dominant role than in adult sentencing, and general deterrence remains relevant but diminished.
The Court also held that the annual review procedure under s. 28 is an integral part of the youth disposition and may be considered as a factor.
The two-year open custody sentence was upheld as fit.
