Court of Appeal for Ontario
Paciocco, George and Dawe JJ.A.
BETWEEN
His Majesty the King
Respondent
and
Jonathan Lambley
Appellant
Jonathan Lambley, acting in person
Jacob Millns, for the respondent
Heard and rendered orally: July 6, 2026
On appeal from the from the sentence imposed by Justice Mark Poland of the Ontario Court of Justice on July 29, 2025.
REASONS FOR DECISION
1The appellant, Jonathan Lambley, seeks leave to appeal the sentence imposed after he was convicted of assaulting, threatening, and stealing from his live-in girlfriend. His primary concern is with restrictive probationary terms the trial judge imposed that were not part of the joint submission on sentence that the parties put forward. He also seeks to reduce the length of the probation term.
2No issue was taken before the trial judge regarding the length of the probation term. It was part of the joint sentence. The trial judge imposed the additional terms because he was not satisfied that the proposed terms of probation provided sufficient protection for the complainant and other women. He noted that Mr. Lambley has abused several women he was in relationships with and has persisted in such conduct despite completing the PARS program on four occasions. Prior to deviating from the joint position on sentence, the trial judge advised counsel that he was considering doing so, gave them a clear indication of the changes he was contemplating, and received extensive submissions. His decision to depart was compliant with the authority, fair, and reasonable, as was the agreed upon length of the sentence. We reject this ground of appeal.
3We also reject Mr. Lambley’s submission that the trial judge erred by assuming facts not agreed to by the parties. We do not read the trial judge as Mr. Lambley does, as inferring that he had caused the death of a prior partner by intentionally crashing his car. The trial judge described the tragic accident in his reasons because it was relevant. The threat that Mr. Lambley was convicted of and was being sentenced for occurred while he was driving and the complainant was his passenger, and the threat was to intentionally drive into an oncoming truck or a ditch. The fact that he would think to make such a threat so closely after the horrific car crash death of his domestic partner in a collision reinforces the risk he presents.
4The appeal is dismissed.
“David M. Paciocco J.A.”
“J. George J.A.”
“J. Dawe J.A.”