R. v. Dennis (T.M.), (2013) 335 B.C.A.C. 201 (CA)

JudgeRyan, Hinkson and MacKenzie, JJ.A.
CourtCourt of Appeal (British Columbia)
Case DateMarch 21, 2013
JurisdictionBritish Columbia
Citations(2013), 335 B.C.A.C. 201 (CA);2013 BCCA 222;2013 BCCA 153

R. v. Dennis (T.M.) (2013), 335 B.C.A.C. 201 (CA);

    573 W.A.C. 201

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] B.C.A.C. TBEd. AP.023

Regina (respondent) v. Tiffany Marie Dennis (appellant)

(CA039651; 2013 BCCA 153; 2013 BCCA 222)

Indexed As: R. v. Dennis (T.M.)

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Ryan, Hinkson and MacKenzie, JJ.A.

March 27, 2013 and May 9, 2013.

Summary:

The accused pled guilty to two counts of fraud against the Ministry of Housing and Social Development (Criminal Code, s. 380(1)), perjury (s. 132), falsifying a document, with intent to defraud (s. 397(1)(a)) and two counts of obtaining goods under $5,000 by false pretence (s. 362(2)(b)). The sentencing judge accepted the joint submission of Crown and defence counsel and imposed one day in jail for one of the offences of false pretences, for which the Crown had proceeded summarily, and a global sentence of a one-year conditional sentence order and a three-year probation order for all the other offences, for which the Crown had proceeded by indictment. After the sentencing, the accused was notified by the Ministry that she was subject to a lifetime ineligibility from receiving income assistance under s. 15(1) of the Employment and Assistance Act (EAA). The accused applied for leave to appeal, seeking to have the sentence on her two "welfare" fraud convictions and the "falsifying a document" conviction reduced to a conditional discharge in order to avoid the collateral consequences of the lifetime ineligibility from benefits. The accused also applied to adduce fresh evidence on her background as a low functioning person and drew the court's attention to s. 15(1) of the EAA and s. 14(1) of the Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Act, which imposed lifetime bans from income and disability assistance as a result of her convictions for welfare fraud and falsifying a document. Those factors were not before the sentencing judge.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal admitted the new evidence. The court granted leave and allowed the appeal. The court replaced the conditional sentence order with a conditional discharge with a probation period of three years from the date of sentence.

Criminal Law - Topic 4431

Procedure - Verdicts - Discharges and dismissals - Conditional discharge in lieu of conviction - See paragraphs 16 to 30.

Criminal Law - Topic 4970

Appeals - Indictable offences - Powers of Court of Appeal - Receiving fresh evidence - See paragraphs 12 to 15.

Criminal Law - Topic 5835.3

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Effect on social benefits (e.g., welfare, social assistance, etc.) - See paragraphs 16 to 30.

Criminal Law - Topic 5846.1

Sentencing - Considerations - Aboriginal offenders - See paragraphs 28 and 29.

Criminal Law - Topic 5859

Sentence - Fraud - See paragraphs 16 to 37.

Criminal Law - Topic 5876

Sentence - Forgery - See paragraphs 16 to 37.

Criminal Law - Topic 6218

Sentencing - Appeals - Variation of sentence - Evidence on appeal (incl. fresh evidence) - See paragraphs 12 to 15.

Practice - Topic 9031

Appeals - Evidence on appeal - Admission of "new evidence" - See paragraphs 12 to 15.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Lévesque (R.), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 487; 260 N.R. 165; 2000 SCC 47, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Palmer, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 759; 30 N.R. 181, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. R.L.W. (2013), 333 B.C.A.C. 218; 571 W.A.C. 218; 2013 BCCA 50, refd to. [para. 16].

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. 16].

R. v. Johnson (D.K.) (1996), 84 B.C.A.C. 261; 137 W.A.C. 261; 112 C.C.C.(3d) 225 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Pham - see R. v. Ly (T.Q.).

R. v. Ly (T.Q.) (2013), 441 N.R. 375; 544 A.R. 40; 567 W.A.C. 40; 2013 SCC 15, consd. [para. 18].

R. v. Fallofield, [1973] 6 W.W.R. 472; 13 C.C.C.(2d) 450 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Friesen (D.R.) (1994), 40 B.C.A.C. 223; 65 W.A.C. 223 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Ipeelee (M.), [2012] 1 S.C.R. 433; 428 N.R. 1; 288 O.A.C. 224; 318 B.C.A.C. 1; 541 W.A.C. 1; 2012 SCC 13, refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. McIsaac, [1998] B.C.J. No. 1946 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Lim, 2005 BCPC 237, refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Keuris (J.F.), [2008] B.C.T.C. Uned. 239; 2008 BCSC 480, refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Fayemi, 2009 BCPC 123, refd to. [para. 29].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 730(1) [para. 19].

Employment and Assistance Act, S.B.C. 2002, c. 40, sect. 15(1), sect. 15(5) [para. 22].

Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Act, S.B.C. 2002, c. 41, sect. 14(1), sect. 14(5) [para. 23].

Counsel:

E.J. Olmstead, for the appellant;

W.J.S. Bell, for the respondent.

This sentence appeal was heard in Vancouver, B.C., on March 21, 2013, before Ryan, Hinkson and MacKenzie, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The following oral reasons for judgment were delivered for the court, by MacKenzie, J.A., on March 27, 2013. Supplementary reasons were delivered by the court on May 9, 2013.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 practice notes
  • A new approach to the consideration of collateral consequences in criminal sentencing.
    • Canada
    • University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review Vol. 72 No. 2, March - March 2014
    • March 22, 2014
    ...R v Bell, 2013 MBQB 80 at para 64, 290 Man R (2d) 79 [Bell]; R v Hepburn, 2013 ABQB 520 at para 46 [Hepburn]. (64) See e.g., R v Dennis, 2013 BCCA 153 at para 7, 296 CCC (3d) 116 [Dennis]; R v Crawford, 2013 BCSC 2121 at para (65) R v Lennox, 2013 BCPC 273 at paras 1-2, 9-10, 60, 109 WCB (2......
1 books & journal articles
  • A new approach to the consideration of collateral consequences in criminal sentencing.
    • Canada
    • University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review Vol. 72 No. 2, March - March 2014
    • March 22, 2014
    ...R v Bell, 2013 MBQB 80 at para 64, 290 Man R (2d) 79 [Bell]; R v Hepburn, 2013 ABQB 520 at para 46 [Hepburn]. (64) See e.g., R v Dennis, 2013 BCCA 153 at para 7, 296 CCC (3d) 116 [Dennis]; R v Crawford, 2013 BCSC 2121 at para (65) R v Lennox, 2013 BCPC 273 at paras 1-2, 9-10, 60, 109 WCB (2......

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