Manslaughter
R. v. Simpson
- Below the Crown's ask
Sentence and the Crown's position
What the law allows
Jesse Arthur Simpson pleaded guilty to manslaughter after supplying fentanyl to a 19-year-old woman who died of an overdose in Halifax in November 2018. The Crown sought three-and-a-half years' imprisonment; the defence sought two years in a federal penitentiary followed by three years of probation. Justice Brothers imposed 30 months in a federal penitentiary, finding a longer term than the defence proposed was needed for denunciation and deterrence while crediting his early plea, cooperation and remorse.
In the judge's words
1I have taken into account Mr. Simpson’s commitment over the last four years to lead a prosocial life, his abstinence from illicit substances and his remorse. However, I do not accept the defence’s proposal that a two-year federal sentence plus three-year probation is enough. I believe a longer term of imprisonment is necessary, given the need for denunciation and deterrence.
The record
- Convicted of
- Manslaughter (CC 236)
- Prior convictions
- 1 prior conviction1
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Defence asked for
- 2 years in custody1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: Melanie Perry
Defence: Ian Hutchinson
Sources
- R. v. Simpson, 2022 NSSC 301 Court decision, CanLII, October 25, 2022
[4] The Crown and defence have agreed that a fit and proper sentence requires the incarceration of Mr. Simpson and that certain ancillary orders should be made. They disagree, however, on the appropriate length of imprisonment. The Crown argues that a sentence of imprisonment of three-and-a-half years is necessary in the circumstances, while the defence submits that two 2 years in a federal penitentiary, followed by three years of probation, is appropriate, taking into account the principles of denunciation and deterrence.
[4] The Crown and defence have agreed that a fit and proper sentence requires the incarceration of Mr. Simpson and that certain ancillary orders should be made. They disagree, however, on the appropriate length of imprisonment. The Crown argues that a sentence of imprisonment of three-and-a-half years is necessary in the circumstances, while the defence submits that two 2 years in a federal penitentiary, followed by three years of probation, is appropriate, taking into account the principles of denunciation and deterrence.
[2] … The accused, Jesse Arthur Simpson, was charged with the following:
[39] Mr. Simpson has a small related prior criminal record for which he has one conviction from July 9, 2009, for drug possession (cannabis) contrary to s. 4(1) of the Controlled Drug and Substances Act , SC 1996, c.19.
[70] I have taken into account Mr. Simpson’s commitment over the last four years to lead a prosocial life, his abstinence from illicit substances and his remorse. However, I do not accept the defence’s proposal that a two-year federal sentence plus three-year probation is enough. I believe a longer term of imprisonment is necessary, given the need for denunciation and deterrence.
[75] Taking into account all of the circumstances, the case law, the principles of sentencing and, in particular, the need for the Court to emphasize denunciation and deterrence, I order you to serve 30 months in a federal penitentiary.
- Criminal Code, s. 236 Record, Justice Laws Website
- R. v. Simpson, 2022 NSSC 301 Court decision, Courts of Nova Scotia