R. v. Murphy (D.D.), 2014 ABCA 409

• Judge: Bielby, Veldhuis and Wakeling, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: October 15, 2014
• Citations: 2014 ABCA 409;(2014), 593 A.R. 60

R. v. Murphy (D.D.) (2014), 593 A.R. 60; 637 W.A.C. 60 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2014] A.R. TBEd. DE.033

Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Dennis Dominic Murphy (respondent)

(1403-0126-A; 2014 ABCA 409)

Indexed As: R. v. Murphy (D.D.)

Alberta Court of Appeal

Bielby, Veldhuis and Wakeling, JJ.A.

December 2, 2014.

Summary:

The accused pleaded guilty to three counts of luring by telecommunications. Two counts related to acts performed before August 9, 2012 (the date on which amendments to the Criminal Code came into effect introducing a one year minimum sentence for luring by telecommunications), and one related to acts performed after August 9, 2012.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench imposed the minimum one year's imprisonment with credit for presentence custody for the offence which took place after August 9, 2012, and concurrent one year prison terms for the other two offences. The court also imposed three years' probation. The Crown appealed.

The Alberta Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and substituted a sentence of two years' imprisonment, concurrent on all three offences, less credit for pretrial custody at a rate of 1.5 to 1, with the other terms of the sentence remaining unchanged.

Editor's note: This judgment was released by the court in a format that complied with a court ordered restriction on publication under s. 486.4 of the Criminal Code prohibiting the disclosure of information that might identify the complainants.

Criminal Law - Topic 4985

Appeals - Indictable offences - Powers of Court of Appeal - Power re grounds not raised on appeal - The 37 year old accused pleaded guilty to three counts of luring by telecommunications - Two counts related to acts performed before August 9, 2012 (the date on which Criminal Code amendments came into effect introducing a one year minimum sentence) and one related to acts performed after August 9, 2012 - Over a 17 month period, the accused engaged in graphic sexual conversations via the internet and texting with persons whom he believed were 15 and 12 year old girls (the recipients were undercover police officers), which included sending images of his genitals - He was married with three kids - Had the support of his family - Remorseful - Willing to take treatment - The trial judge imposed the minimum one year's imprisonment with credit for presentence custody for the offence which took place after August 9, 2012, and concurrent one year prison terms for the other two offences - The judge also imposed three years' probation - The Alberta Court of Appeal substituted a sentence of two years' imprisonment, concurrent on all three offences, less credit for pretrial custody at a rate of 1.5 to 1, with the other terms of the sentence remaining unchanged - Wakeling, J.A., in determining the appropriate sentence, set out an analytical framework involving a series of distinct inquiries - See paragraphs 29 to 74 - Bielby and Veldhuis, JJ.A., stated that the appeal had to be resolved using previously established sentencing principles, rather than "a unique, new sentencing regime" - Further, it would be improper to intrude into areas not raised or addressed by counsel, and upon which they had not been given an opportunity to comment - See paragraphs 1 to 5.

Criminal Law - Topic 5950.1

Sentence - Internet luring - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4985 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Mian (M.H.) (2014), 462 N.R. 1; 580 A.R. 1; 620 W.A.C. 1; 2014 SCC 54, refd to. [para. 1].

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, refd to. [para. 28, footnote 3].

R. v. Shropshire (M.T.), [1995] 4 S.C.R. 227; 188 N.R. 284; 65 B.C.A.C. 37; 106 W.A.C. 37, refd to. [para. 28, footnote 3].

R. v. Shular (R.) (2014), 577 A.R. 294; 613 W.A.C. 294; 2014 ABCA 241, refd to. [para. 28, footnote 3].

R. v. Lyons, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 309; 80 N.R. 161; 82 N.S.R.(2d) 271; 207 A.P.R. 271, refd to. [para. 29, footnote 4].

R. v. J.L.M.A. (2010), 499 A.R. 1; 514 W.A.C. 1; 264 C.C.C.(3d) 134 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 29, footnote 4].

R. v. Arcand - see R. v. J.L.M.A.

R. v. Song (Z.) (2009), 257 O.A.C. 221; 249 C.C.C.(3d) 289 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 29, footnote 4].

Gall v. United States of America (1970), 552 U.S. 38, refd to. [para. 29, footnote 6].

R. v. Innes (J.) (2008), 429 A.R. 164; 421 W.A.C. 164 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 30, footnote 12].

R. v. Mackie (D.T.) (2014), 588 A.R. 1; 626 W.A.C. 1; 2014 ABCA 221, refd to. [para. 34, footnote 17].

R. v. Laberge (K.K.) (1995), 165 A.R. 375; 89 W.A.C. 375 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35, footnote 18].

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, refd to. [para. 38, footnote 27].

R. v. Tallman, Tallman, Laboucan and Auger (1989), 94 A.R. 251; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 81 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 38, footnote 28].

Reference Re Section 94(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act (B.C.), [1985] 2 S.C.R. 486; 63 N.R. 266, refd to. [para. 39, footnote 29].

R. v. Fertig (W.D.) (2014), 584 A.R. 85; 623 W.A.C. 85; 2014 ABCA 317, refd to. [para. 39, footnote 30].

R. v. Flight (R.I.) (2014), 584 A.R. 392; 623 W.A.C. 392; 2014 ABCA 380, refd to. [para. 42, footnote 35].

United States of America v. Holmes (1842), 26 F. Cas. 360 (Pa. C.C.E.D.), refd to. [para. 46, footnote 47].

R. v. Chornoby, [1981] Sask. D. 5602-1, refd to. [para. 46, footnote 48].

R. v. Campbell (1972), 10 C.C.C.(2d) 26 (Alta. Dist. Ct.), refd to. [para. 46, footnote 49].

R. v. Bailey (1800), 168 Eng. Rep. 651 (Cr. Cas. Res.), refd to. [para. 46, footnote 49].

Griffin v. Wisconsin (1987), 483 U.S. 868 [para. 71, footnote 74].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Gaylin and Rothman, Introduction in von Hirsch, Andrew, Doing Justice: The Choice of Punishments (1976), xxxvii [para. 51, footnote 57].

Lynch, Parole and the Habitual Criminal (1967), 13 McGill L. Rev. 632, p. 644 [para. 47, footnote 50].

Manson, Allan, The Law of Sentencing (2001), pp. 130 [paras. 29, 42, 52, footnotes 5, 34, 58]; 131 [paras. 34, 47, 49, footnotes 15, 50, 53]; 134, 135 [para. 46, footnote 47]; 138 [para. 50, footnote 56]; 151 to 158 [para. 43, footnote 41].

Mueller and Le Poole, Appellate Review of Legal but Excessive Sentences (1968), 21 Vand. L. Rev. 411, pp. 414 [para. 29, footnote 7]; 417 [para. 29, footnote 6].

Ross, Law, Science and Accidents: The British Road Safety Act of 1967 (1973), 2 J. Legal Stud. 1, p. 8 [para. 42, footnote 35].

von Hirsch, Andrew, Doing Justice: The Choice of Punishments (1976), pp. xxxvii [para. 51, footnote 57]; 5 [para. 56, footnote 65]; 29 [para. 29, footnote 7]; 66 [para. 36, footnote 22]; 70 [para. 37, footnote 26]; 98 [para. 37, footnote 25].

United States, Sentencing Commission Guidelines, Guidelines Manual (2014), § 1A1.2 [para. 29, footnote 4].

Counsel:

J.A. Morgan, for the appellant;

S.N. De Souza, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on October 15, 2014, by Bielby, Veldhuis and Wakeling, JJ.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal. The memorandum of judgment of the court was filed at Edmonton, Alberta, on December 2, 2014, with the following opinions:

Bielby and Veldhuis, JJ.A. - See paragraphs 1 to 5;

Wakeling, J.A. - See paragraphs 6 to 74.