R. v. Beauchamp (C.H.),

• Judge: Hutchinson,Verville,Wittmann
• Neutral Citation: 2002 ABCA 60
• Subject Matter: CRIMINAL LAW
• Citation: 2002 ABCA 60,(2002), 299 A.R. 344 (CA),299 AR 344,(2002), 299 AR 344 (CA),299 A.R. 344
• Date: 19 February 2002
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)

R. v. Beauchamp (C.H.) (2002), 299 A.R. 344 (CA);

    266 W.A.C. 344

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2002] A.R. TBEd. MR.036

Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Charles Henry Beauchamp (respondent)

(01-00465; 2002 ABCA 60)

Indexed As: R. v. Beauchamp (C.H.)

Alberta Court of Appeal

Wittmann, J.A., Hutchinson and Verville, JJ.(ad hoc)

February 19, 2002.

Summary:

The accused pleaded guilty to manslaughter. The sentencing judge sentenced him to two years' imprisonment. The Crown appealed.

The Alberta Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that a fit and proper sentence was four years' imprisonment. The court reduced the sentence to three years and 10 months after crediting the accused for pre-sentence custody.

Criminal Law - Topic 5882

Sentence - Manslaughter - The accused and Rash had several drinks together at a tavern - Rash was returning to the accused's farm driving the accused's truck - The truck rolled and went off the highway - The accused came to the accident scene - The accused spoke to Rash - The accused "went crazy" and began slashing and stabbing Rash with a knife - Rash died - Rash had previously threatened the accused - The accused pleaded guilty to manslaughter - The sentencing judge sentenced him to two years' imprisonment - The Alberta Court of Appeal held that the sentence was demonstrably unfit - A fit and proper sentence was four years' imprisonment - The court reduced the sentence to three years and 10 months after crediting the accused for pre-sentence custody.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Laberge (K.K.) (1995), 165 A.R. 375; 89 W.A.C. 375 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Dubasz (W.J.) (1995), 165 A.R. 399; 89 W.A.C. 399 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Lavoie (1987), 78 A.R. 327 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Bird, [1996] A.J. No. 1252 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Fengstad, [1994] A.J. No. 370 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Hanley (K.A.) et al. (1998), 228 A.R. 291; 188 W.A.C. 291 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Jackson (W.J.) (1996), 184 A.R. 93; 122 W.A.C. 93 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. McMahon (S.D.) (1996), 181 A.R. 251; 116 W.A.C. 251 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Sangha (K.S.) (2001), 288 A.R. 170 (Q.B.) refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Larocque (B.L.) (1992), 136 A.R. 128 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Poucette (M.) (1999), 250 A.R. 55; 213 W.A.C. 55 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Desjardins, [1987] Alta. D. 7290-01 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Narayan (S.G.) (2001), 299 A.R. 191; 266 W.A.C. 191 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

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. 19].

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; 105 C.C.C.(3d) 327, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. McDonnell (T.E.), [1997] 1 S.C.R. 948; 210 N.R. 241; 196 A.R. 321; 141 W.A.C. 321; 114 C.C.C.(3d) 437, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Millward (R.C.) (2000), 271 A.R. 372; 234 W.A.C. 372 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].

R. v. Buggins, [2002] A.J. No. 96 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 25].

Counsel:

E.J. Tolppanen, for the appellant;

A.B. Beresh, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard before Wittmann, J.A., Hutchinson and Verville, JJ.(ad hoc), of the Alberta Court of Appeal. On February 19, 2002, Wittmann, J.A., delivered the following memorandum of judgment orally for the Court of Appeal.