R. v. Bradbury (E.T.), (2013) 339 B.C.A.C. 169 (CA)

JudgeProwse, D. Smith and Neilson, JJ.A.
CourtCourt of Appeal (British Columbia)
Case DateApril 19, 2013
JurisdictionBritish Columbia
Citations(2013), 339 B.C.A.C. 169 (CA);2013 BCCA 280

R. v. Bradbury (E.T.) (2013), 339 B.C.A.C. 169 (CA);

    578 W.A.C. 169

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] B.C.A.C. TBEd. JN.036

Regina (respondent) v. Ellwood Thomas Bradbury (appellant)

(CA040382; 2013 BCCA 280)

Indexed As: R. v. Bradbury (E.T.)

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Prowse, D. Smith and Neilson, JJ.A.

June 14, 2013.

Summary:

The accused pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. In calculating an actual sentence of 20 months' imprisonment, the sentencing judge applied a credit of 1:1 for the time the accused spent in custody between his arrest and guilty plea, and an enhanced credit of 1.5:1 for the time between his guilty plea and sentence. The accused appealed the sentence. At issue was the interpretation of ss. 719(3) and 719(3.1) of the Criminal Code (i.e., the provisions relating to calculation of credit for time served).

The British Columbia Court of Appeal, Prowse, J.A., dissenting, dismissed the appeal. The court disagreed with the interpretation of ss. 719(3) and 719(3.1) from the appellate courts in Nova Scotia, Manitoba and Ontario which concluded that the potential loss of remission or parole eligibility in remand custody were circumstances which could be taken into account when considering whether to grant enhanced credit at a ratio of up to 1.5:1.

Criminal Law - Topic 5848.2

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Time already served - See paragraphs 1 to 70.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Fice (L.), [2005] 1 S.C.R. 742; 333 N.R. 243; 198 O.A.C. 146; 2005 SCC 32, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Morris (K.A.), [2011] O.T.C. Uned. 5206; 2011 ONSC 5206, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. D.W.J., 2012 BCPC 15, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Prince (W.E.), [2012] B.C.T.C. Uned. 293; 2012 BCSC 293, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Seymour (C.W.), [2011] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1682; 2011 BCSC 1682, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Sharkey (R.), [2011] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1541; 2011 BCSC 1541, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Carvery (L.A.) (2012), 321 N.S.R.(2d) 321; 1018 A.P.R. 321; 2012 NSCA 107, disagreed with [para. 22].

R. v. Stonefish (S.T.) (2012), 288 Man.R.(2d) 103; 564 W.A.C. 103; 2012 MBCA 116, disagreed with [paras. 22, 53].

R. v. Summers (S.) (2013), 302 O.A.C.322; 2013 ONCA 147, disagreed with [paras. 22, 53].

R. v. Joseph (D.W.) (2012), 326 B.C.A.C. 312; 554 W.A.C. 312; 2012 BCCA 359, refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Bui (T.T.) (2001), 158 B.C.A.C. 21; 258 W.A.C. 21; 2001 BCCA 471, refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Wust (L.W.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 455; 252 N.R. 332; 134 B.C.A.C. 236; 219 W.A.C. 236; 2000 SCC 18, refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Rezaie (M.) (1996), 96 O.A.C. 268; 112 C.C.C.(3d) 97 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Orr (C.) (2008), 251 B.C.A.C. 303; 420 W.A.C. 303; 228 C.C.C.(3d) 432; 2008 BCCA 76, refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Mills (D.J.) (1999), 119 B.C.A.C. 284; 194 W.A.C. 284; 133 C.C.C.(3d) 451; 1999 BCCA 159, refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Bernier (D.C.) (2003), 179 B.C.A.C. 218; 295 W.A.C. 218; 117 C.C.C.(3d) 137; 2003 BCCA 134, refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. R.M.S. (2007), 247 B.C.A.C. 148; 409 W.A.C. 148; 2007 BCCA 502, refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Calder Berg (S.L.) (2007), 243 B.C.A.C. 179; 401 W.A.C. 179; 221 C.C.C.(3d) 449; 2007 BCCA 343, refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Mayers (A.W.) (2011), 310 B.C.A.C. 188; 526 W.A.C. 188; 88 C.R.(6th) 226; 2011 BCCA 365, refd to. [para. 37].

Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Bankrupt), Re, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 27; 221 N.R. 241; 106 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 41].

Bell ExpressVu Limited Partnership v. Rex et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 559; 287 N.R. 248; 166 B.C.A.C. 1; 271 W.A.C. 1; 2002 SCC 42, refd to. [para. 41].

R. v. Vittrekwa (G.), [2011] Yukon Cases Uned. (TC) 64; 275 C.C.C.(3d) 193; 2011 YKTC 64, refd to. [para. 42].

R. v. A.D.H. (2013), 444 N.R. 293; 2013 SCC 28, refd to. [para. 44].

R. v. Proulx (J.K.D.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 61; 249 N.R. 201; 142 Man.R.(2d) 161; 212 W.A.C. 161; 2000 SCC 5, refd to. [para. 47].

R. v. Palmer, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 759; 30 N.R. 181, refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Lévesque (R.), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 487; 260 N.R. 165; 2000 SCC 47, refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Carvery (L.A.) (2012), 321 N.S.R.(2d) 321; 1018 A.P.R. 321; 2012 NSCA 107, refd to. [para. 53].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 719(3), sect. 719(3.1) [para. 1].

Truth in Sentencing Act, S.C. 2009, c. 29, generally [para. 3].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Driedger, Elmer A., Construction of Statutes (2nd Ed. 1983), p. 87 [para. 41].

Counsel:

J.W. Sherren, for the appellant;

T.C. Gerhart and J.K. Torrance, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on April 19, 2013, before Prowse, D. Smith and Neilson, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was delivered on June 14, 2013, including the following opinions:

D. Smith, J.A. (Neilson, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 52;

Prowse, J.A., dissenting - see paragraphs 53 to 70.

To continue reading

Request your trial
50 practice notes
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Anatomy of Criminal Procedure. A Visual Guide to the Law Post-trial matters Special Post-conviction Procedures
    • 15 Junio 2019
    ...170 R v BR, 2011 NLCA 23 ........................................................................................ 72 R v Bradbury, 2013 BCCA 280 .......................................................................... 384 R v Brand, 2006 BCSC 305 ................................................
  • R. v. Nur (H.),
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • 12 Noviembre 2013
    ...322; 114 O.R.(3d) 641; 2013 ONCA 147, leave to appeal granted [2013] S.C.C.A. No. 191, refd to. [para. 95]. R. v. Bradbury (E.T.) (2013), 339 B.C.A.C. 169; 578 W.A.C. 169; 298 C.C.C.(3d) 31; 2013 BCCA 280, refd to. [para. R. v. Luxton, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 711; 112 N.R. 193; 111 A.R. 161; 58 C.C......
  • R. v. Letiec (S.A.), 2015 ABCA 123
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • 25 Marzo 2015
    ...v. Cluney (N.) (2013), 338 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 57; 1049 A.P.R. 57 (N.L.C.A.), refd to. [para. 2, footnote 3]. R. v. Bradbury (E.T.) (2013), 339 B.C.A.C. 169; 578 W.A.C. 169; 298 C.C.C.(3d) 31 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 2, footnote Berro v. Berro (2001), 286 A.R. 124; 253 W.A.C. 124 (C.A.), re......
  • R. v. Canto (N.), (2015) 607 A.R. 298
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • 18 Junio 2015
    ...ABPC 183, refd to. [para. 51]. R. v. Chin (Y.H.), [2012] A.R. Uned. 669; 2012 ABPC 341, refd to. [para. 51]. R. v. Bradbury (E.T.) (2013), 339 B.C.A.C. 169; 578 W.A.C. 169; 2013 BCCA 280, refd to. [para. R. v. Werner (M.J.), [2015] B.C.A.C. Uned. 30; 2015 BCCA 106, refd to. [para. 56]. Stat......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
46 cases
  • R. v. Nur (H.),
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • 12 Noviembre 2013
    ...322; 114 O.R.(3d) 641; 2013 ONCA 147, leave to appeal granted [2013] S.C.C.A. No. 191, refd to. [para. 95]. R. v. Bradbury (E.T.) (2013), 339 B.C.A.C. 169; 578 W.A.C. 169; 298 C.C.C.(3d) 31; 2013 BCCA 280, refd to. [para. R. v. Luxton, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 711; 112 N.R. 193; 111 A.R. 161; 58 C.C......
  • R. v. Letiec (S.A.), 2015 ABCA 123
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • 25 Marzo 2015
    ...v. Cluney (N.) (2013), 338 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 57; 1049 A.P.R. 57 (N.L.C.A.), refd to. [para. 2, footnote 3]. R. v. Bradbury (E.T.) (2013), 339 B.C.A.C. 169; 578 W.A.C. 169; 298 C.C.C.(3d) 31 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 2, footnote Berro v. Berro (2001), 286 A.R. 124; 253 W.A.C. 124 (C.A.), re......
  • R. v. Canto (N.), (2015) 607 A.R. 298
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • 18 Junio 2015
    ...ABPC 183, refd to. [para. 51]. R. v. Chin (Y.H.), [2012] A.R. Uned. 669; 2012 ABPC 341, refd to. [para. 51]. R. v. Bradbury (E.T.) (2013), 339 B.C.A.C. 169; 578 W.A.C. 169; 2013 BCCA 280, refd to. [para. R. v. Werner (M.J.), [2015] B.C.A.C. Uned. 30; 2015 BCCA 106, refd to. [para. 56]. Stat......
  • R. v. K.R.J., (2014) 362 B.C.A.C. 86 (CA)
    • Canada
    • British Columbia Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • 4 Junio 2014
    ...or retroactive operation - Criminal or penal legislation - See paragraphs 91 to 101. Cases Noticed: R. v. Bradbury (E.T.) (2013), 339 B.C.A.C. 169; 578 W.A.C. 169; 2013 BCCA 280, refd to. [para. 3]. R. v. Summers (S.) (2014), 456 N.R. 1; 316 O.A.C. 349; 2014 SCC 26, refd to. [para. 3]. R. v......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Anatomy of Criminal Procedure. A Visual Guide to the Law Post-trial matters Special Post-conviction Procedures
    • 15 Junio 2019
    ...170 R v BR, 2011 NLCA 23 ........................................................................................ 72 R v Bradbury, 2013 BCCA 280 .......................................................................... 384 R v Brand, 2006 BCSC 305 ................................................
  • Credit for Pre-sentence Custody
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Anatomy of Criminal Procedure. A Visual Guide to the Law Post-trial matters Special Post-conviction Procedures
    • 15 Junio 2019
    ...prescribed by s 719(3) could be exceeded only in special circumstances, unique to individual offenders: see, for example, R v Bradbury , 2013 BCCA 280 at paras 43–49. The prevailing view, however, was that the circumstances that could justify a 1.5:1 rate of credit were not so limited, and ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT