R v Alexander,

JurisdictionBritish Columbia
JudgeMacKenzie J.A.,Madam Justice MacKenzie,Dickson J.A.,Bennett J.A.
CounselCounsel for the Respondent: O.P. Kirk R.G. Garson,Counsel for the Appellant: D.N. Fai
Citation2019 BCCA 100
Docket NumberCA45332
Date11 March 2019
CourtCourt of Appeal (British Columbia)

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
21 practice notes
  • R v Hills
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • July 10, 2020
    ...offender: production of cannabis if number of plants is more than six and less than 200) & sexual offences: The Queen v. Alexander, 2019 BCCA 100; 54 C.R. 7th 164 (possession of child pornography); The Queen v. E.O., 2019 YKCA 9; 374 C.C.C. 3d 338, leave to appeal ref’d, [2019] S.C.C.A.......
  • Sentencing Charts
    • Canada
    • Criminal Law Series Sentencing: Principles and Practice, 2nd Edition
    • May 3, 2024
    ...an appropriate sentence given conduct over months but positive community support; conditional sentence not appropriate R v Alexander , 2019 BCCA 100 8 months’ incarceration and 18 months’ probation, upheld on appeal • Pled guilty to possession of child pornography for regular viewing over c......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Criminal Law Series Sentencing: Principles and Practice, 2nd Edition
    • May 3, 2024
    ...296 Alexander , R v , 2017 ONCA 181 ........................................................ 620 Alexander , R v , 2019 BCCA 100 ........................................................ 537 Ali , R v , 1997 CanLII 2655, 98 BCAC 239 ................................................ 313 Al-Isa......
  • R. v. K.M.
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • March 4, 2022
    ...mandatory minimum sentence for possession of child pornography could not be constitutionally defended in light of Swaby, R. v. Alexander, 2019 BCCA 100 (discussed below) and R. v. Hamlin 2019 BCSC 2266 (discussed below). He declared the mandatory minimum sentence of six months imprisonment ......
  • Get Started for Free
19 cases
  • R v Hills
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • July 10, 2020
    ...offender: production of cannabis if number of plants is more than six and less than 200) & sexual offences: The Queen v. Alexander, 2019 BCCA 100; 54 C.R. 7th 164 (possession of child pornography); The Queen v. E.O., 2019 YKCA 9; 374 C.C.C. 3d 338, leave to appeal ref’d, [2019] S.C.C.A.......
  • R. v. K.M.
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • March 4, 2022
    ...mandatory minimum sentence for possession of child pornography could not be constitutionally defended in light of Swaby, R. v. Alexander, 2019 BCCA 100 (discussed below) and R. v. Hamlin 2019 BCSC 2266 (discussed below). He declared the mandatory minimum sentence of six months imprisonment ......
  • R. v. Hagen
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • May 28, 2021
    ...by indictment has been declared inoperative in this province on constitutional grounds. See R. v. Cole, 2021 BCSC 293; R. v. Alexander, 2019 BCCA 100; R. v. Hamlin, 2019 BCSC 2266; R. v. Swaby, 2018 BCCA 416, leave ref’d, [2019] S.C.C.A. No. [25] In seeking a conditional sentence, appellant......
  • R v Caribou
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Manitoba)
    • December 6, 2022
    ...is an exercise of judicial discretion and is entitled to deference (see R v JED, 2018 MBCA 123 at para 87; and R v Alexander, 2019 BCCA 100 at paras 50, 56).  An appellate court is justified in intervening in a trial judge’s exercise of discretion only if a trial judge misd......
  • Get Started for Free
2 books & journal articles
  • Sentencing Charts
    • Canada
    • Criminal Law Series Sentencing: Principles and Practice, 2nd Edition
    • May 3, 2024
    ...an appropriate sentence given conduct over months but positive community support; conditional sentence not appropriate R v Alexander , 2019 BCCA 100 8 months’ incarceration and 18 months’ probation, upheld on appeal • Pled guilty to possession of child pornography for regular viewing over c......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Criminal Law Series Sentencing: Principles and Practice, 2nd Edition
    • May 3, 2024
    ...296 Alexander , R v , 2017 ONCA 181 ........................................................ 620 Alexander , R v , 2019 BCCA 100 ........................................................ 537 Ali , R v , 1997 CanLII 2655, 98 BCAC 239 ................................................ 313 Al-Isa......