Case information

Criminal law — Sentencing — Young person sentenced as adult — What are the factors to consider when determining whether the Crown has rebutted the presumption of diminished moral culpability under s. 72(1)(a) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, S.C. 2002, c. 1 — When determining whether a youth sentence would hold an offender accountable under s. 72(1)(b) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, should an appellate court only consider what was or would have been available at the time of the initial sentencing hearing — If the sentencing of the appellant relied on errors of law, what is the appropriate sentence?<br>

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

(PUBLICATION BAN IN CASE) (PUBLICATION BAN ON PARTY) (CERTAIN INFORMATION NOT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC)

The appellant and two co-accused executed a planned shooting of a sixteen year old youth. A fourth co-accused was present at the shooting but did not participate in planning the shooting or in the shooting. The victim was lured into an apartment stairwell where the appellant shot him in the head. The appellant and his co-accused were charged with first degree murder. All four co-accused were sixteen years old at the time of the offence. They were tried jointly in Youth Court before a judge without a jury. The appellant and two of his co-accused were convicted of first degree murder. The fourth co-accused was acquitted. At the sentencing hearing, the Crown applied to have all three offenders sentenced as adults. The sentencing judge allowed the application and sentenced the appellant and his co-assailants to life sentences with ten years’ parole ineligibility, pursuant to s. 745.1(b) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant’s appeal from his sentence.