Incarceration (Civil Contempt): Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
[10] At para. 35, Lamer C.J.C. noted that Parliament intended a conditional sentence to be more punitive than a suspended sentence and probation. At para. 39, he stated that where an offender breaches a condition without reasonable excuse, there is a presumption that the offender will serve the remainder of his or her sentence in jail. This is unlike breach of a probation order, which requires a new charge. He stated that the constant threat of incarceration will help to ensure that the offender complies with the conditions. | [10] At para. 35, Lamer C.J.C. noted that Parliament intended a conditional sentence to be more punitive than a suspended sentence and probation. At para. 39, he stated that where an offender breaches a condition without reasonable excuse, there is a presumption that the offender will serve the remainder of his or her sentence in jail. This is unlike breach of a probation order, which requires a new charge. He stated that the constant threat of incarceration will help to ensure that the offender complies with the conditions. | ||
<ref name="Carr-Carey">Carr-Carey v. Carey, 2014 ONSC 6764 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/gfcct>, retrieved on 2020-09-10</ref> | <ref name="Carr-Carey">Carr-Carey v. Carey, 2014 ONSC 6764 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/gfcct>, retrieved on 2020-09-10</ref> | ||
<ref name="Proulx">R. v. Proulx, 2000 SCC 5 (CanLII), [2000] 1 SCR 61, <http://canlii.ca/t/527b>, retrieved on 2020-09-10</ref> | <ref name="Proulx">R. v. Proulx, 2000 SCC 5 (CanLII), [2000] 1 SCR 61, <http://canlii.ca/t/527b>, retrieved on 2020-09-10</ref> | ||
==References== | |||
Revision as of 14:41, 10 September 2020
Carr-Carey v. Carey, 2014 ONSC 6764 (CanLII)[1]
[9] In R. v. Proulx, 2000 SCC 5 (CanLII), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 61, Lamer C.J.C.,[2] for a unanimous court, at para. 29, made it clear that a conditional sentence is a sentence of imprisonment. The sentence of imprisonment is served in the community, subject to conditions. It is intended to be punitive, but also addresses rehabilitative objectives.
[10] At para. 35, Lamer C.J.C. noted that Parliament intended a conditional sentence to be more punitive than a suspended sentence and probation. At para. 39, he stated that where an offender breaches a condition without reasonable excuse, there is a presumption that the offender will serve the remainder of his or her sentence in jail. This is unlike breach of a probation order, which requires a new charge. He stated that the constant threat of incarceration will help to ensure that the offender complies with the conditions.
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Carr-Carey v. Carey, 2014 ONSC 6764 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/gfcct>, retrieved on 2020-09-10
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 R. v. Proulx, 2000 SCC 5 (CanLII), [2000] 1 SCR 61, <http://canlii.ca/t/527b>, retrieved on 2020-09-10
