Sexual interference
R. v. C.M.S.
A publication ban applies. The offender is not named.
Sentence and the Crown's position
What the law allows
A jury found the offender guilty of sexual interference and sexual assault for touching a child under 14 for a sexual purpose on four occasions in Digby County in the summer of 2005; the sexual assault count was stayed. The Crown sought 24 months' imprisonment followed by 3 years' probation, and the defence a conditional sentence of 18 months to two years less a day. Justice Bodurtha imposed 24 months' imprisonment followed by 3 years' probation, finding the offender was in a position of trust and that the abuse was repeated.
In the judge's words
1This is a serious offence committed against a young, female, Indigenous child, of whom C.M.S. was in a position of trust. This was not a single incident. The sexual abuse took place on four occasions.
The record
- Convicted of
- Sexual interference (CC 151)
- Prior convictions
- 0 prior convictions1
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Defence asked for
- 18 months conditional sentence1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: Josie McKinney, Chelsea Cottreau
Defence: Raymond Jacquard
Sources
- R. v. C.M.S., 2022 NSSC 166 Court decision, CanLII, May 20, 2022
[8] The Crown’s position is that a fit and proper sentence for C.M.S. is: … 24 months custody, followed by 3 years probation
[10] It is the Defence’s position that an appropriate sentence is a custodial term between the range of 18 months to two years’ less a day to be served in the community pursuant to a Conditional Sentence Order, followed by two years’ probation.
[7] There was no mandatory minimum in existence as of the time of the offence and, as a result, a conditional sentence order is available for C.M.S.
[18] C.M.S. has no prior criminal record. I have been referred to a dated sexual offence from 1996 for which C.M.S. received a conditional discharge. While this is not considered a prior conviction, it is still a relevant consideration in the highly individualized process that is sentencing.
[67] … This is a serious offence committed against a young, female, Indigenous child, of whom C.M.S. was in a position of trust. This was not a single incident. The sexual abuse took place on four occasions.
[70] … I find that the sentence proposed by the Crown is appropriate and sentence C.M.S. to 24 months’ imprisonment to be followed by 3 years’ probation including the conditions, referenced above pursuant to sections 732.1(2) and 732.1(3) of the Criminal Code.
- R. v. C.M.S., 2022 NSSC 166 Court decision, Courts of Nova Scotia