COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

CITATION: R. v. Borges, 2008 ONCA 401

DATE: 20080522

DOCKET: C46140

MOLDAVER, SHARPE AND BLAIR JJ.A.

BETWEEN:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Respondent

And

NUELO BORGES

Appellant

Counsel:

Daniel A. Stein for the appellant

Jamie C. Klukach for the respondent

Heard and endorsed: May 20, 2008

On appeal from the conviction entered by Justice Denise E. Bellamy of the Superior Court of Justice dated June 22, 2006 and from the sentence imposed by Justice Bellamy dated September 25, 2006.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] While we agree that the probation officer, at points in the pre-sentence report, exceeded the bounds of what is proper by using emotive and highly-charged language in describing the appellant, we find no indication that this tainted the trial judge’s approach to the sentencing or otherwise affected the sentence she imposed.

[2] In our view, the trial judge’s reasons for sentence reflect a careful and measured assessment and reveal no error in principle; nor in our view is pre-sentence excessive, let alone manifestly excessive. The appellant’s conduct towards the ten-year-old complainant was most disturbing and when considered in the context of a prior sexual assault against another 10-year-old child and the appellant’s complete and continued denial of any involvement in the present offences, the sentence imposed was fit and necessary for the protection of society. Accordingly, leave to appeal sentence is granted but the appeal is dismissed.