Digest: R v T.A.S., 2018 SKQB 183

• Date: June 18, 2018

Reported as: 2018 SKQB 183

Docket Number: QB17569 , CRIM 12/16 JCY

Court: Court of Queen's Bench

Date: 2018-06-18

Judges:

• Barrington-Foote

Subjects:

• Criminal Law � Sexual Offences - Sexual Touching � Victim under 16 � Sentencing
• Criminal Law � Mandatory Minimum Sentence � Constitutional Challenge
• Constitutional Law � Charter of Rights, Section 7

Digest: The accused was convicted of sexual touching pursuant to s. 151 of the Criminal and sexual assault pursuant to s. 271 of the Code (see: 2017 SKQB 339) with the latter charge conditionally stayed pending the expiration of the appeal period. The sentencing hearing pursuant to s. 151 of the Code was accompanied by the accused�s challenge to the constitutionality of the mandatory minimum sentence imposed by s. 151 of the Code and of s. 490.012(1) of the Code pursuant to s. 7 of the Charter, because the Code provision requires a sentencing judge to make an order requiring an offender to comply with the Sex Offender Information Registration Act (SOIRA) for a 20-year period specified in s. 490.013 of the Code. The conviction resulted from four sexual encounters that occurred between September 2014 and January 2015 when the accused was 22 and the victim 14 years of age. The accused was the victim�s school bus driver prior to and at the time the sexual touching occurred. The victim initiated the communication and although the accused resisted, he eventually agreed to meet her, and the sexual encounters ensued because the victim threatened suicide. The victim�s mother was very ill at the time and she was vulnerable. The accused had no prior criminal record, nor had he had any prior sexual experience. His psychiatric assessment found him capable of appreciating the nature and quality of his acts but showed that he had little insight into his behaviour, was emotionally immature and had difficulty responding to some social situations. The victim gave a victim impact statement and said that she had suffered from guilt and that she had retreated from a social life for two years because of what had happened.
HELD: The accused was sentenced to 15 months� imprisonment with 12 months� probation. He would be registered for 20 years under SOIRA. The court determined the proportionate sentence having regard to the objectives and principles of sentencing set out in the Code without regard to the mandatory minimum. The sentence was proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the accused�s degree of responsibility. Accordingly, the constitutionality of the mandatory minimum specified by s. 151 would have no effect on the accused�s sentence and the constitutional issue was...