Latest News Articles

[25]           Having reviewed the Crown’s authorities, I am not persuaded that they support the sentence being sought here. Some are easily distinguishable from the case at bar.  In R. v. Aguas, [2015] O.J. No. 4739 (S.C.J.), the accused, a nurse, was convicted of both voyeurism and sexual assault in relation to two different victims.  Both victims were extremely vulnerable, one having just attempted suicide and the other having recently been in a serious caraccident.  The fact that there were multiple victims and their extreme vulnerability both played a significant part in the sentencing judge’s decision to impose a 14-month sentence.  R. v. Hall, [2010] A.J. No. 586 (C.A.) bears very little factual similarity to this case except that both involved a fondling of the victim’s breasts.  In any event, the Court in that case held that a six-month sentence was appropriate.  R. v. Im, [2009] O.J. No. 373 (C.A.) involved a physician who rubbed his genitals against a patient while examining her.  He received a six-month conditional sentence.  The Court of Appeal’s judgment sets out its reasons for refusing leave to appeal a Summary Conviction Appeal Court decision dismissing a conviction appeal.  There is no discussion with respect to how the sentence was arrived at.

http://canlii.ca/t/grql5