R. v. R.F.G.,

• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Judge: Larlee, Deschênes and Richard, JJ.A.
• Neutral Citation: 2006 NBCA 104
• Citation: (2006), 308 N.B.R.(2d) 133 (CA),2006 NBCA 104,308 NBR (2d) 133,[2006] NBJ No 511 (QL),308 N.B.R.(2d) 133,308 NBR(2d) 133,[2006] N.B.J. No 511 (QL),(2006), 308 NBR(2d) 133 (CA)
• Date: 31 October 2006
• Court: Court of Appeal (New Brunswick)

R. v. R.F.G. (2006), 308 N.B.R.(2d) 133 (CA);

    308 R.N.-B.(2e) 133; 797 A.P.R. 133

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

Temp. Cite: [2006] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. DE.021

Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. R.F.G. (respondent)

(10/06/CA; 2006 NBCA 104)

Indexed As: R. v. R.F.G.

New Brunswick Court of Appeal

Larlee, Deschênes and Richard, JJ.A.

November 30, 2006.

Summary:

The accused, a grade 6 teacher, sexually assaulted one of her students. She was 27 years old and he was 13. There was unpro­tected vaginal-penile intercourse and the accused performed oral sex on the victim after having purchased alcohol for his con­sumption. The trial judge sentenced the accused to two years less a day, to be served in the community. The Crown applied for leave to appeal and, if leave was granted, appealed the sentence.

The New Brunswick Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and substituted a sentence of two years less a day in prison.

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, Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.

Criminal Law - Topic 5720.4

Punishments (sentence) - Conditional sentence - When available or appropriate - The accused, a grade 6 teacher, sexually assaulted one of her students - She was 27 years old and he was 13 - She pled guilty at the first opportunity, showed genuine remorse and was a first offender - It was a one time incident, but planning was in­volved - The relationship was nurtured and the student was "groomed" - There was unprotected vaginal-penile intercourse and the accused performed oral sex on the victim after having purchased alcohol for his consumption - The trial judge imposed a conditional sentence of two years less a day - The New Brunswick Court of Appeal substituted a sentence of two years less a day in prison - The conditional sentence did not adequately take into account the principle that deterrence must play a deter­mining role in sentencing for sexual as­saults against students by teachers - The accused abused one of the most sacred trust relationships in society.

Criminal Law - Topic 5720.4

Punishments (sentence) - Conditional sentence - When available or appropriate - The New Brunswick Court of Appeal stated that "... teachers ought to know that if they decide to have sexual relations with their students, jail awaits them. Society's revulsion and intolerance for this sort of behaviour, the betrayal of trust by a teach­er, require it." - See paragraph 38.

Criminal Law - Topic 5831.1

Sentencing - Considerations - Offences involving breach of trust - [See both Crimi­nal Law - Topic 5720.4 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5833

Sentencing - Considerations - Deterrence - [See first Criminal Law - Topic 5720.4 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5848.9

Sentencing - Considerations - Sexual of­fences against children (incl. child por­nography) - [See both Criminal Law - Topic 5720.4 and Criminal Law - Topic 5849.6 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5849.6

Sentencing - Considerations - Prohibited or improper considerations - The New Bruns­wick Court of Appeal stated that "when a student is sexually assaulted by a teacher neither the sex of the accused nor the victim should play a significant role in the determination of the sentence. Gender must not become the focus when the crime is that of an assault by a teacher against a student." - See paragraph 37.

Criminal Law - Topic 5932

Sentence - Sexual assault (incl. by multiple parties) - [See first Criminal Law - Topic 5720.4 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. R.K.J. (1998), 207 N.B.R.(2d) 24; 529 A.P.R. 24 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Collier (G.E.) (2006), 303 N.B.R.(2d) 369; 787 A.P.R. 369; 2006 NBCA 92, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. R.T.S., [2006] N.B.R.(2d) Uned. 93; 2006 NBCA 65, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Gallon (R.S.) (2006), 297 N.B.R.(2d) 317; 771 A.P.R. 317; 2006 NBCA 31, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Marley (K.L.) (2006), 299 N.B.R.(2d) 169; 778 A.P.R. 169; 2006 NBCA 47, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. K.G.B. and S.R.B. (2005), 291 N.B.R.(2d) 327; 758 A.P.R. 327; 2005 NBCA 96, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. L.R.P. (2004), 290 N.B.R.(2d) 345; 755 A.P.R. 345; 2004 NBCA 76, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Munn (P.J.N.) (2004), 272 N.B.R.(2d) 269; 715 A.P.R. 269; 2004 NBCA 44, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. M.V. (2003), 266 N.B.R.(2d) 64; 698 A.P.R. 64; 2003 NBCA 93, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Cormier (1977), 16 N.B.R.(2d) 710; 21 A.P.R. 710 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Bourque (1977), 17 N.B.R.(2d) 469; 23 A.P.R. 469 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Matchett (H.J.) (1997), 188 N.B.R.(2d) 321; 480 A.P.R. 321 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Basque (G.) (1999), 211 N.B.R.(2d) 273; 539 A.P.R. 273 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Baldwin (M.) (2000), 232 N.B.R.(2d) 240; 598 A.P.R. 240; 2000 NBCA 60, refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Adler (S.A.) (1999), 208 N.B.R(2d) 381; 531 A.P.R. 381 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Augustine (P.E.) (1999), 221 N.B.R.(2d) 83; 567 A.P.R. 83 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Murray (R.) (2000), 230 N.B.R.(2d) 11; 593 A.P.R. 11; 2000 NBCA 2, refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Steeves (C.E.) et al. (2005), 288 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 751 A.P.R. 1; 2005 NBCA 85, refd to. [para. 22].

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; 2000 SCC 5, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. L.F.W., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 132; 249 N.R. 345; 185 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; 562 A.P.R. 1; 2000 SCC 6, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. R.N.S., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 149; 249 N.R. 365; 132 B.C.A.C. 1; 215 W.A.C. 1; 2000 SCC 7, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. R.A.R., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 163; 249 N.R. 322; 142 Man.R.(2d) 282; 212 W.A.C. 282; 2000 SCC 8, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Wells (J.W.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 207; 250 N.R. 364; 250 A.R. 273; 213 W.A.C. 273; 30 C.R.(5th) 254; 182 D.L.R.(4th) 257; 2000 SCC 10, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Bunn (T.A.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 183; 249 N.R. 296; 142 Man.R.(2d) 256; 212 W.A.C. 256; 140 C.C.C.(3d) 505; 30 C.R.(5th) 86; [2000] 4 W.W.R. 1; 2000 CarswellMan 16; 2000 SCC 9, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Springer (1988), 88 N.B.R.(2d) 177; 224 A.P.R. 177 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. F.S.A. (1996), 182 N.B.R.(2d) 20; 463 A.P.R. 20; 109 C.C.C.(3d) 427 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. E.S. (1997), 191 N.B.R.(2d) 3; 488 A.P.R. 3 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

Attis v. Board of Education of District No. 15 et al., [1996] 1 S.C.R. 825; 195 N.R. 81; 171 N.B.R.(2d) 321; 437 A.P.R. 321, refd to. [para. 29].

Ross v. New Brunswick School District No. 15 - see Attis v. Board of Education of District No. 15 et al.

R. v. Forde, [1992] O.J. No. 1698 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Hupe, [1988] M.J. No. 549 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 31].

R. v. R.P. (2001), 245 N.B.R.(2d) 179; 636 A.P.R. 179; 2001 NBCA 115, refd to. [para. 33].

R. v. R.W.D. (2005), 199 O.A.C. 254 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

R. v. McDonnell (T.E.), [1997] 1 S.C.R. 948; 210 N.R. 241; 196 A.R. 321; 141 W.A.C. 321, refd to. [para. 36].

Counsel:

Stephen J. Holt, for the appellant;

James J. Matheson, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on October 31, 2006, by Larlee, Deschênes and Richard, JJ.A., of the New Brunswick Court of Ap­peal. Larlee, J.A., delivered the following reasons for judgment for the court on No­vember 30, 2006.