Following guilty pleas to sexual interference, making an arrangement by telecommunication to commit a specified sexual offence against a child, breaching a prohibition order, and breaching probation, the Crown sought a dangerous offender designation.
The offender consented to designation but argued for a shorter determinate sentence and enhanced pre-sentence custody credit.
Applying the dangerous offender framework, the court found the statutory criteria met beyond a reasonable doubt and concluded that the offender posed a high likelihood of harmful recidivism, but that a determinate penitentiary sentence combined with a 10-year long-term supervision order would adequately protect the public.
An eight-year sentence was imposed on the predicate offences, with 41 months of pre-sentence custody enhanced to 46 months, together with extensive ancillary orders.
