R. v. Hopley (R.P.), (2015) 380 B.C.A.C. 160 (CA)

JudgeSaunders, D. Smith and MacKenzie, JJ.A.
CourtCourt of Appeal (British Columbia)
Case DateOctober 27, 2015
JurisdictionBritish Columbia
Citations(2015), 380 B.C.A.C. 160 (CA);2015 BCCA 499

R. v. Hopley (R.P.) (2015), 380 B.C.A.C. 160 (CA);

    655 W.A.C. 160

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] B.C.A.C. TBEd. DE.010

Regina (respondent) v. Randall Peter Hopley (appellant)

(CA41894; 2015 BCCA 499)

Indexed As: R. v. Hopley (R.P.)

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Saunders, D. Smith and MacKenzie, JJ.A.

December 4, 2015.

Summary:

The accused pleaded guilty to, and was convicted of, one count of abducting a child, two counts of breaking and entering, and one count of possession of stolen property contrary to the Criminal Code. The matter moved to sentencing.

The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a decision reported [2013] B.C.T.C. Uned. 2427, declared the accused to be a long-term offender. He was sentenced to a determinate sentence of 59½ months' incarceration with ten years' supervision, credit having been given on a 1:1 basis for 26½ months' pre-sentence custody. He appealed his sentence respecting the amount of credit he should have received for that pre-sentence custody. The accused argued that the judge erred in failing to assign credit for pre-sentence custody at the rate of 1.5:1, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Summers (2014). The Crown claimed that the judge was properly within her discretion in assigning the reduced amount of credit for pre-sentence custody. In support of the sentence imposed, the Crown applied to adduce fresh evidence of the accused's failure to make any significant progress in his rehabilitation through his participation in and completion of the high intensity Sex Offender Program.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the Crown's application to adduce fresh evidence and dismissed the accused's sentence appeal.

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 (in this case an order under s. 486.5 of the Criminal Code), Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.

Criminal Law - Topic 5848.2

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Time already served - See paragraphs 47 to 61.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Summers (S.) (2014), 456 N.R. 1; 316 O.A.C. 349; 2014 SCC 26, refd to. [para. 1].

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. 9].

R. v. Helm (T.L.) (2006), 226 B.C.A.C. 198; 373 W.A.C. 198; 2006 BCCA 240, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Brown (J.D.) (2014), 362 B.C.A.C. 22; 622 W.A.C. 22; 2014 BCCA 439, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Brennan (J.M.) (2015), 368 B.C.A.C. 253; 633 W.A.C. 253; 2015 BCCA 114, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Keyler (J.W.), [2015] B.C.A.C. Uned. 9; 2015 BCCA 48, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Steele (J.M.) (2014), 463 N.R. 125; 310 Man.R.(2d) 236; 618 W.A.C. 236; 2014 SCC 61, refd to. [para. 56].

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. 57].

R. v. Cote (K.J.) (2015), 457 Sask.R. 237; 632 W.A.C. 237; 2015 SKCA 52, refd to. [para. 58].

R. v. Johnson (J.J.), [2003] 2 S.C.R. 357; 308 N.R. 333; 186 B.C.A.C. 161; 306 W.A.C. 161; 2003 SCC 46, refd to. [para. 59].

Counsel:

R. Thirkell and K. Beatch, for the appellant;

M.J. DeWitt-Van Oosten, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on October 27, 2015, in Vancouver, B.C., before Saunders, D. Smith and MacKenzie, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The following decision was delivered for the court by D. Smith, J.A., on December 4, 2015.

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 practice notes
  • R. v. Millie,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • May 20, 2022
    ...In R v Hopley, 2015 BCCA 499, the court adopted the reasoning in E.E.D. and Cote, and said this with respect to credit for pre-sentence custody in Part XXIV [59]   Sentences under Part XXIV of the Code are structurally different and have a different focus than those under Part XXI......
  • R. v. Lukyn,
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • June 17, 2022
    ...R. v. Reis, 2011 BCSC 319; R. v. Latreille, 2009 BCSC 1892; R. v. A.A.B., 1997 ABCA 385; R. v. Summers, 2014 SCC 26; and R. v. Hopley, 2015 BCCA 499. [219]    Upon consideration of the cases cited, I have determined that the range of sentence appropriate in this case is one o......
  • R. v. S.W.P.,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • December 23, 2020
    ...the Supreme Court observed that a judge retains the discretion “to deny credit at the enhanced rate”. (At para. 17.) In R. v. Hopley 2015 BCCA 499, this court upheld a sentencing judge’s refusal to give a long‑term offender enhanced credit. As in this case, the trial judge had been motivate......
  • R. v. Hudec (K.), 2016 SKPC 16
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • February 16, 2016
    ...is at the forefront: Knife; R v E.E.D. , 2007 SKCA 99, 304 Sask R 192 [ E.E.D. ]; R v Cote , 2015 SKCA 52 [ Cote ]. [114] In R v Hopley , 2015 BCCA 499, the Court adopted the reasoning in E.E.D. and Cote , and said this with respect to credit for pre-sentence custody in Part XXIV applicatio......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
11 cases
  • R. v. Millie,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • May 20, 2022
    ...In R v Hopley, 2015 BCCA 499, the court adopted the reasoning in E.E.D. and Cote, and said this with respect to credit for pre-sentence custody in Part XXIV [59]   Sentences under Part XXIV of the Code are structurally different and have a different focus than those under Part XXI......
  • R. v. S.W.P.,
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • December 23, 2020
    ...the Supreme Court observed that a judge retains the discretion “to deny credit at the enhanced rate”. (At para. 17.) In R. v. Hopley 2015 BCCA 499, this court upheld a sentencing judge’s refusal to give a long‑term offender enhanced credit. As in this case, the trial judge had been motivate......
  • R. v. Hudec (K.), 2016 SKPC 16
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • February 16, 2016
    ...is at the forefront: Knife; R v E.E.D. , 2007 SKCA 99, 304 Sask R 192 [ E.E.D. ]; R v Cote , 2015 SKCA 52 [ Cote ]. [114] In R v Hopley , 2015 BCCA 499, the Court adopted the reasoning in E.E.D. and Cote , and said this with respect to credit for pre-sentence custody in Part XXIV applicatio......
  • R. v. Lukyn,
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • June 17, 2022
    ...R. v. Reis, 2011 BCSC 319; R. v. Latreille, 2009 BCSC 1892; R. v. A.A.B., 1997 ABCA 385; R. v. Summers, 2014 SCC 26; and R. v. Hopley, 2015 BCCA 499. [219]    Upon consideration of the cases cited, I have determined that the range of sentence appropriate in this case is one o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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