R. v. McLeod (R.G.), (1992) 109 Sask.R. 8 (CA)

• Judge: Bayda, C.J.S., Vancise and Jackson, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: November 13, 1992
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1992), 109 Sask.R. 8 (CA);1992 CanLII 8279 (SK CA);1992 CanLII 8279 (BS SC);81 CCC (3d) 83;[1992] SJ No 672 (QL);109 Sask R 8

R. v. McLeod (R.G.) (1992), 109 Sask.R. 8 (CA);

    42 W.A.C. 8

MLB headnote and full text

Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. Rodney Guy McLeod (respondent)

(Appeal No. 5711)

Indexed As: R. v. McLeod (R.G.)

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Bayda, C.J.S., Vancise and Jackson, JJ.A.

November 13, 1992.

Summary:

The accused pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in a schedule F drug contrary to s. 31 of the Food and Drug Act and to a charge of breach of a probation order. The trial judge suspended sentence for two years and placed the accused on intensive supervi­sion probation on condition that he partici­pate for the first six months in the electronic monitoring program. The Crown appealed.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dis­missed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 5605

Punishments (sentence) - Alternative sanctions - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal discussed alternative sanctions to imprisonment - See paragraphs 14 to 61.

Criminal Law - Topic 5605

Punishments (sentence) - Alternative sanctions - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal set forth a number of factors to be considered in determining whether a non-custodial sentence should be imposed - See paragraph 32.

Criminal Law - Topic 5653

Punishments (sentence) - Imprisonment and parole - House arrest - Electronic monitoring - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal discussed the development and utilization of the electronic monitoring program as an alternative to incarceration - See paragraphs 40 to 55.

Criminal Law - Topic 5653

Punishments (sentence) - Imprisonment and parole - House arrest - Electronic monitoring - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5850 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5850

Sentence - Trafficking in a drug - The 30 year old accused was persuaded to sell prescription drugs to an undercover po­liceman - He pleaded guilty to trafficking in a drug and to breach of a probation order - Lengthy criminal record - Some offences committed while on probation - However, very successful rehabilitation measures undertaken, including enrolment in high school equivalency courses, enrol­ment in AA, church activities - The trial judge suspended sentence for two years and placed the accused on intensive super­vision probation with a condition that he participate for the first six months in an electronic monitoring program - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal affirmed the sentence - See paragraphs 62 to 78.

Criminal Law - Topic 5898

Sentence - Breach of probation - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5850 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. McGinn (1989), 75 Sask.R. 161; 49 C.C.C.(3d) 137 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Morrissette (1970), 1 C.C.C.(2d) 307; 12 C.R.N.S. 392; 75 W.W.R.(N.S.) 644 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Wood (1976), 1 A.R. 35; 26 C.C.C.(2d) 100 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Grady (1973), 5 N.S.R.(2d) 264 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 59].

R. v. Wenarchuk, [1982] 3 W.W.R. 643; 15 Sask.R. 240; 67 C.C.C.(2d) 169 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 60].

R. v. Ulrich (1990), 75 Sask.R. 26; 16 M.V.R.(2d) 150 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 60].

R. v. Melnyk (1985), 45 Sask.R. 258 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 61].

R. v. Gordon (1984), 34 Sask.R. 232 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 61].

R. v. Natanson, [1927] 2 W.W.R. 154; 49 C.C.C. 89 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 61].

R. v. Potie (1970), 74 W.W.R.(N.S.) 235 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 67].

R. v. Toth (1972), 5 C.C.C.(2d) 358 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 67].

R. v. Euinton (1981), 15 Sask.R. 169 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 68].

R. v. Steinberg (1981), 15 Sask.R. 172 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 68].

R. v. Krett (1989), 74 Sask.R. 58 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 68].

R. v. Baldhead, [1966] 4 C.C.C. 183 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 68].

R. v. Erdmann (1991), 92 Sask.R. 65 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 76].

R. v. Pearman (1990), 89 Sask.R. 156 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 77].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 348(1), sect. 348(1)(a) [para. 4]; sect. 740(1) [para. 1].

Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27, sect. 31 [para. 1].

Narcotic Control Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-1, sect. 3(1) [para. 4].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Archambault Report - see Canadian Sen­tencing Commission, Sentencing Reform: A Cana­dian Approach.

Canada, Correctional Services, Basic Facts About Corrections in Canada (1986), generally [para. 35].

Canada, Correctional Services, Basic Facts About Corrections in Canada (1991), generally [para. 35].

Canada, Law Reform Commission, Im­prisonment and Release (1956), Working Paper 11, generally [para. 25].

Canada, Law Reform Commission, Studies on Sentencing (1974c), p. 4 [para. 19].

Canada, Law Reform Commission, The Principles of Sentencing and Dispositions (1974a), Working Paper 3, p. x [para. 19].

Canadian Committee on Corrections, Towards Unity: Criminal Justice and Corrections (1969), generally [para. 16].

Canadian Sentencing Commission, Sen­tencing Reform: A Canadian Approach (1987), generally [para. 16]; p. 135 [para. 22].

Cousineau, F.D., Legal Sanctions and Deterrence (1986), p. viii [para. 26].

Ouimet Report - see Canadian Committee on Corrections, Towards Unity: Criminal Justice and Corrections.

Standing Committee on Justice and the Solicitor General, Taking Responsibility (1988), p. 49 [para. 16].

The Price of Tagging, 140 New Law Jour­nal, p. 1629 [para. 40].

United States, National Academy of Sciences, Blumstein, A., T. Cohen and D. Nagin (Eds.), Deterrence and Incapacitation: Estimating the Effects of Criminal Sanctions on Crime Rates (1978), p. 7 [para. 25].

Young, Allen, The Role of an Appellate Court in Developing Sentencing Guidelines (1984), generally [para. 31].

Counsel:

D.G. Curliss, for the Crown;

R. Weisgerber, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on November 13, 1992, before Bayda, C.J.S., Vancise and Jackson, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was delivered on November 13, 1992, and the following written reasons were filed on March 31, 1993:

Vancise, J.A. (Jackson, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 79;

Bayda, C.J.S., concurring - see paragraph 80.