|
Criminal - Sentencing - COVID. R. v. Storey
In R. v. Storey (Ont CA, 2025) the Ontario Court of Appeal allowed a criminal sentencing appeal, here on the partial basis that "the trial judge refused to account for the harsh conditions of COVID-19 at sentencing":(b) The Trial Judge Erred in Denying the Appellant COVID-19 Credit
[71] The parties agree that the trial judge erred in refusing to grant the appellant credit for the harsh conditions of incarceration during the COVID-19 pandemic. So do I. Those conditions represent a collateral consequence that can entitle an offender to a reduction in the quantum of their sentence: R. v. Stephens, 2024 ONCA 793, at para. 13, fn. 1, citing R. v. Marshall, 2021 ONCA 344, at para. 50. That reduction does not become unavailable just because it would allow the offender to entirely avoid incarceration during the pandemic. By concluding otherwise, the trial judge erred in principle, and that error in principle plainly impacted the sentence. I would grant the appellant the three-month credit he seeks, and to which the Crown consents. . R. v. Robinson
In R. v. Robinson (Ont CA, 2023) the Court of Appeal grants a sentencing appeal due to harsher incarceration conditions caused by COVID:[8] Based on our review of the fresh evidence, we are satisfied that the impact of the COVID‑19 pandemic and the restrictions that were imposed resulted in the appellant experiencing, for a little over two years while incarcerated, significantly harsher conditions than would otherwise have been the case. This does not reduce the appellant’s moral blameworthiness or the seriousness of the crimes that he committed. But it has resulted in the appellant experiencing harsher conditions than were anticipated at the time he was sentenced. Having considered the circumstances of the offences and the offender, in particular his early guilty plea which resulted in the pandemic being an unknown factor at sentencing, we are satisfied that reducing the sentence as proposed will not give rise to an unfit sentence.
[9] In the result, leave to appeal sentence is granted, the appeal is allowed, and the appellant’s sentence of imprisonment is reduced by 18 months. All other terms of the sentence imposed shall remain in full force and effect.
|
