R. v. B.B.,

• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Judge: Laskin, Gillese and Blair, JJ.A.
• Neutral Citation: 2009 ONCA 114
• Citation: (2009), 247 O.A.C. 37 (CA),2009 ONCA 114,93 OR (3d) 643,241 CCC (3d) 491,64 CR (6th) 112,[2009] OJ No 452 (QL),247 OAC 37,(2009), 247 OAC 37 (CA),247 O.A.C. 37,[2009] O.J. No 452 (QL),93 O.R. (3d) 643
• Date: 17 December 2008
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)

R. v. B.B. (2009), 247 O.A.C. 37 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2009] O.A.C. TBEd. FE.034

Her Majesty The Queen (respondent) v. B.B. (applicant/appellant)

(C48970; 2009 ONCA 114)

Indexed As: R. v. B.B.

Ontario Court of Appeal

Laskin, Gillese and Blair, JJ.A.

February 5, 2009.

Summary:

The accused pleaded guilty to one count of child abduction (i.e., taking a newborn infant from a hospital), and was sentenced to five years' imprisonment. She applied for leave to appeal the sentence.

The Ontario Court of Appeal, Blair, J.A., dissenting, granted leave to appeal, allowed the appeal and imposed a sentence of 2.5 years' incarceration (in addition to pre-sentence custody), less credit for time served.

Editor's Note: Certain names in the following case have been initialized or the case otherwise edited to prevent the disclosure of identities where required by law, publication ban, Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.

Criminal Law - Topic 5801.2

Sentencing - General - Restraint in imposing incarceration - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5831.7 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5831.7

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Accused abused as child - The accused, a 30 year old Aboriginal woman, abducted a newborn infant from a hospital, to replace her own baby which was stillborn following an unprovoked beating - The infant was recovered from the accused, unharmed, seven hours later - Victim of physical, sexual and emotional abuse - No prior record - Mental health issues - Remorseful - The accused pleaded guilty to child abduction - The sentencing judge imposed a sentence of five years' imprisonment in addition to time served - The accused appealed the sentence - The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and imposed a sentence of 2.5 years' incarceration (in addition to pre-sentence custody), less credit for time served - The court held that the sentencing judge erred in using the seven year sentence in R. v. Hill as a baseline (2004 Gen. Div affd. on appeal) - The facts of Hill were materially different and it was decided before s. 718.2(e) of the Criminal Code dealing with restraint in incarceration was enacted - Here, the sentencing judge should have, after determining that a penitentiary sentence was warranted, consistent with the principle of restraint, considered the minimum sentence that was adequate in the circumstances - Also, the sentencing judge gave predominance to general deterrence and denunciation without express consideration of the accused's rehabilitation - The factors of deterrence and punishment assumed less importance because of the accused's mental illness.

Criminal Law - Topic 5832

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Rehabilitation - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5831.7 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5833

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Deterrence - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5831.7 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5834.7

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Mental illness or disorder - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5831.7 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5846.1

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Aboriginal offenders - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5831.7 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5846.5

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Sentence precedents (incl. starting point principle) - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5831.7 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5848.7

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Denunciation or repudiation of conduct - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5831.7 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5904

Sentence - Kidnapping and abduction - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5831.7 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Gillen, [1979] B.C.J. No. 575 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 17, 69, footnote 5].

R. v. Hill, [1995] O.J. No. 1859 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 17, 66].

R. v. Hucal (D.E.) (1998), 109 B.C.A.C. 227; 177 W.A.C. 227; 52 B.C.L.R.(3d) 319 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 17, 69, footnote 6].

R. v. Jones, [2002] O.J. No. 5148 (Ct. J.), refd to. [paras. 17, 69, footnote 7].

R. v. Priest (J.) (1996), 93 O.A.C. 163; 30 O.R.(3d) 538 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 32, 64].

R. v. Blanas (T.) (2006), 207 O.A.C. 226 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].

R. v. Dubinsky (C.), [2005] O.A.C. Uned. 123; 2005 CanLII 5668 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Gladue (J.T.), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688; 238 N.R. 1; 121 B.C.A.C. 161; 198 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Wells (J.W.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 207; 250 N.R. 364; 250 A.R. 273; 213 W.A.C. 273, refd to. [paras. 36, 51].

R. v. Robinson (1974), 19 C.C.C.(2d) 193 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 38].

R. v. Hiltermann (S.G.) (1993), 141 A.R. 223; 46 W.A.C. 223 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 38].

R. v. Peters (D.A.) (2000), 194 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 184; 584 A.P.R. 184 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 38].

R. v. C.A.M., [1996] 1 S.C.R. 500; 194 N.R. 321; 73 B.C.A.C. 81; 120 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 45].

R. v. Shropshire (M.T.), [1995] 4 S.C.R. 227; 188 N.R. 284; 65 B.C.A.C. 37; 106 W.A.C. 37, refd to. [para. 45].

R. v. Kakekagamick (M.R.) (2006), 214 O.A.C. 127; 81 O.R.(3d) 664 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Whiskeyjack (R.) (2008), 243 O.A.C. 150; 2008 ONCA 800, refd to. [para. 52].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 718.2(e) [para. 35].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Ruby, Clayton C., Copeland, Jill, Davies, Breese, Doucette, Delmar, and Lifkowski, Richard, Sentencing (6th Ed. 2004), pp. 443, 444 [para. 61, footnote 4].

Counsel:

Frank Addario and Berk Keaney, for the appellant;

Karen Shai, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on December 17, 2008, by Laskin, Gillese and Blair, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The judgment of the Court of Appeal was released on February 5, 2009, and the following opinions were filed:

Gillese, J.A. (Laskin, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 42;

Blair, J.A., dissenting - see paragraphs 43 to 82.