In R. v. P.S. (Ont CA, 2024) the Court of Appeal considers the role of physical handicaps in sentencing quantum and terms:
[2] P.S. made no submissions on conviction. He appeals his sentence and asks this court to convert the remaining 90 days to a conditional sentence. He does so on the basis of his ailing health. P.S. articulated the health issues including COPD which requires oxygen, a hernia, anxiety, depression and possible bladder surgery.
[3] The sentencing judge considered and rejected a conditional sentence concluding that she was “not satisfied that a conditional sentence, even a strict lengthy conditional sentence, followed by probation, will meet the fundamental purposes and principles of sentencing.” The health issues he now raises were before the sentencing judge and she determined that there was “absolutely no evidence that a carceral setting would be unable to accommodate his medical condition”.
[4] We too have no evidence that P.S.’s health issues are not being nor cannot be accommodated.
[5] We therefore dismiss the appeal, allow leave to appeal sentence but dismiss the sentence appeal.
The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.
