R. v. Sharp (T.P.), 2004 YKCA 10

• Judge: Saunders, Levine and Thackray, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Yukon Territory)
• Case Date: August 12, 2004
• Jurisdiction: Yukon
• Citations: 2004 YKCA 10;(2004), 202 B.C.A.C. 235 (YukCA)

R. v. Sharp (T.P.) (2004), 202 B.C.A.C. 235 (YukCA);

    331 W.A.C. 235

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2004] B.C.A.C. TBEd. AU.011

Regina (respondent) v. Thomas Paul Sharp (appellant)

(CA03-YU509; 2004 YKCA 10)

Indexed As: R. v. Sharp (T.P.)

Yukon Court of Appeal

Saunders, Levine and Thackray, JJ.A.

August 12, 2004.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of forcible seizure, breach of recognizance, sexual assault with a weapon and kidnapping. Subsequently, pursuant to s. 753 of the Criminal Code, the accused was declared to be a dangerous offender. The accused appealed his forcible seizure and breach of recognizance convictions.

The Yukon Court of Appeal, in a judgment reported (2004), 197 B.C.A.C. 145; 323 W.A.C. 145, dismissed the appeal. The accused also appealed his designation as a dangerous offender.

The Yukon Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 6503

Dangerous or long-term offenders - Deten­tion - General - Dangerous offender defined - The 41 year old accused appealed his designation as a dangerous offender on the ground that the judge erred in finding that the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that there was no reason­able possibility of eventually controlling the risk in the community posed by the accused - The accused alleged that the judge erred in failing to adequately con­sider that the risk of reoffending could be reduced to an acceptable level through "burn out", chemical and behavioral treat­ment and restrictions imposed under a long-term supervision order - The Yukon Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - The determi­nation as to whether an accused was a dan­gerous offender was essentially a fact finding entitled to con­siderable deference - The judge neither ignored nor misapprehended the evidence - The judge's conclusion was amply sup­ported by the evidence - It was not the function of the court, on appeal, to reweigh the evidence and reach a different conclusion on controllability of the risk.

Criminal Law - Topic 6516

Dangerous or long-term offenders - Deten­tion - Appeals - Scope of - [See Criminal Law - Topic 6503 ].

Cases Noticed:

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, refd to. [para. 4].

R. v. Currie (R.O.R.), [1997] 2 S.C.R. 260; 211 N.R. 321; 100 O.A.C. 161; 115 C.C.C.(3d) 205, refd to. [para. 16].

Counsel:

G.R. Coffin, for the appellant;

E.J. Horembala, Q.C., and J.W. Phelps, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on May 26, 2004, at Whitehorse, Yukon Territory, before Saun­ders, Levine and Thackray, JJ.A., of the Yukon Court of Appeal.

On August 12, 2004, Saunders, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.