R. v. Curran (T.A.); The Attitude of the Offender as Noted in a Probation Officer's Report, Re (Comment), (1998) 161 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 70

• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: March 10, 1998
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1998), 161 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 70

R. v. Curran (T.A.) (Comment) (1998), 161 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 70;

    497 A.P.R. 70

MLB headnote and full text

CASE COMMENT

R. v. Curran (T.A.) (1997), 151 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 222; 471 A.P.R. 222 (P.E.I.C.A.)

Indexed As: R. v. Curran (T.A.); The Attitude of the Offender as Noted in a Probation Officer's Report, Re (Comment)

Ontario Court of Justice

Provincial Division

Renaud, P.D.J.

March 10, 1998.

Summary:

This case comment contains no summary.

Criminal Law - Topic 5812

Sentencing - Sentencing procedure and the rights of the accused - Use of presentence reports - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5843 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5843

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Content of a presentence report - A commentator reviewed the purpose of a presentence report and the court's con­cern with an offender's attitude - The commentator concluded that "an offender's attitude, that is to say the ability and will­ingness to learn 'a lesson' from the Court proceedings and the disposition, may be the most important feature of the probation officer's report. As a result, every effort should be made to assist the offender to correct his or her attitude with the help of parents, friends and counsellors prior to sentence and by the help of the probation officer after the matter has been dealt with by the courts. A successful change in attitude may well be the hallmark of a reformed and productive member of the community.".

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Bell (J.C.) (1997), 157 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; 486 A.P.R. 1 (P.E.I.T.D.), refd to. [para. 1].

R. v. Dalzell (1991), 87 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 353; 271 A.P.R. 353 (P.E.I.T.D.), refd to. [para. 1].

R. v. MacPhee (1991), 94 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 300; 298 A.P.R. 300 (P.E.I.T.D.), refd to. [para. 1, footnote 1].

R. v. Edwards (1986), 60 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 36; 181 A.P.R. 36 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Butler (S.H.) (1988), 69 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 126; 211 A.P.R. 126 (P.E.I.T.D.), refd to. [para. 3].

R. v. Gauthier (R.E.) (1996), 137 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 246; 428 A.P.R. 246 (P.E.I.T.D.), refd to. [para. 3].

R. v. James (1971), 1 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 398 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. DeBarros (1987), 63 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 42; 194 A.P.R. 42 (P.E.I. Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Longaphee, [1992] P.E.I.J. No. 171, refd to. [para. 5, footnote 3].

R. v. Doiron (D.J.) (1987), 67 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 137; 206 A.P.R. 137 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Arsenault (1981), 30 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 489; 84 A.P.R. 489 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Bruce (1982), 35 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 530; 99 A.P.R. 530 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Generoux (N.S.) (1994), 122 Sask.R. 4 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 6, footnote 4].

R. v. Iwaniw (1959), 127 C.C.C. 40 (Man. C.A.), refd to. [para. 6, footnote 5].

R. v. King (1990), 66 Man.R.(2d) 130 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Giles (1992), 123 A.R. 104 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Anguish (1992), 81 Man.R.(2d) 155; 30 W.A.C. 155 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8, footnote 6].

R. v. Moyan (1991), 1 B.C.A.C. 37; 1 W.A.C. 37 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Sanchez-Pino (1973), 11 C.C.C.(2d) 53 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Sandercock (1985), 62 A.R. 382; 48 C.R.(3d) 154 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Laroque (1987), J.E. 87-673, refd to. [para. 10, footnote 8].

R. v. Smit (S.W.) (1992), 11 B.C.A.C. 139; 22 W.A.C. 139 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10, footnote 8].

R. v. MacAdam, [1987] P.E.I.J. No. 58, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Abbott (1985), 36 Man.R.(2d) 187 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Doucette (C.) (1994), 146 N.B.R.(2d) 281; 374 A.P.R. 281 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 11, footnote 9].

R. v. Lelas (1990), 41 O.A.C. 73; 58 C.C.C.(3d) 568; 74 O.R.(2d) 552 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 12, footnote 10].

R. v. Ciccozzi (S.) (1992), 15 B.C.A.C. 237; 27 W.A.C. 237 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 12, footnote 10].

R. v. Matrai, [1972] 2 O.R. 25; 6 C.C.C.(2d) 62 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 12, footnote 10].

MacMillan Bloedel Ltd. v. Brown et al. (1994), 44 B.C.A.C. 241; 71 W.A.C. 241 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 12, footnote 11].

R. v. Jones (1994), 24 W.C.B.(2d) 198 (B.C. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 12, footnote 11].

R. v. Muise (1994), 135 N.S.R.(2d) 81; 386 A.P.R. 81 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Kozy (1990), 41 O.A.C. 27 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Doucette (L.J.) (1995), 130 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 170; 405 A.P.R. 170 (P.E.I.T.D.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Marchbank (1990), 82 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 17; 257 A.P.R. 17 (P.E.I.T.D.), refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. S.S. (1990), 84 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 102; 262 A.P.R. 102 (P.E.I.T.D.), refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. C.B.S. (1994), 124 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 91; 384 A.P.R. 91 (P.E.I.T.D.), refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Gauthier (R.E.) (1996), 137 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 246; 428 A.P.R. 246 (P.E.I.T.D.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. D.A.R., [1991] P.E.I.J. No. 77, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Doyle, [1992] P.E.I.J. No. 123 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 20, footnote 15].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 721(3)(a) [para. 3].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Sentencing (1981), p. 30 [para. 6, footnote 5].

Counsel:

[None disclosed.]

This case comment was delivered by Renaud, P.D.J., of the Ontario Court of Justice, Provincial Division, on March 10, 1998.