Sentencing

• Author: Hy Bloom, Richard D Schneider
• Pages: 317-324

317

chapter ten

Sentencing

A. SENTENCING

A just sentence must f‌it the offender as well as the offence. “The determin-

ation of a just and appropriate sentence is a delicate art which attempts to

balance carefully the societal goals of sentencing against the moral blame-

worthiness of the offender and the circumstances of the offence, while at

all times tak ing into account the needs and current conditions of and in the

community.”1

It is assumed that people understand that rehabilitat ion and supervision

are more important than punish ment when sentencing the mentally i ll.2 Re-

habilitation is crucial to t he protection of the public as it aids the prevention

of reoffending.3 By treating the root cause of the criminality the probability

of reoffendi ng is reduced.

Mental disorder may have been operative in the commission of the of-

fence, but not to an extent suff‌icient to have an impact upon the verdict, or

the accused may have quite rationally elected not to raise the issue during

the course of the trial not withstanding the potential success of the defence.

The court must nevertheless take into consideration evidence of mental

disorder during the sentencing process.

B. PARTICULAR SENTENCING CONSIDER ATIONS

Generally, mental disorder is seen as a factor in mitigation for the following

reasons:

1 R v CAM, [1996] 1 SCR 500 at para 91, La mer CJC.

2 R v Edmunds, [2012] NJ No 177 (CA) [Edmunds].

3 R v Branton, [2012] NJ No 474 (Prov Ct) [Branton].