Robbery

R. v. Antonius

  • No jail for a violent offence

Sentence and the Crown's position

Crown asked18 months conditional sentence1
Judge imposed18-month conditional sentence (first 6 months house arrest), plus $846.40 restitution1

A conditional sentence is served in the community, usually under house arrest. It counts as no custody here.

What the law allows

MaximumLife imprisonment
Crown asked18 months conditional sentence
Judge imposed18 months conditional sentence
Defence askedSuspended sentence
For robbery (CC 344), the Criminal Code currently allows up to life imprisonment, with no mandatory minimum. Life is drawn at 25 years for scale. Read the section.

A jury convicted Shiny Christy Antonius of robbery for taking part, with two others, in a swarming attack on a neighbour in Mission in 2022 to take a dog from her. The Crown sought an 18-month conditional sentence with six months of house arrest; the defence sought a suspended sentence. Justice Fitzpatrick imposed the 18-month conditional sentence the Crown proposed and ordered $846.40 in restitution, finding that rehabilitation and a low risk of reoffending made a jail sentence served in the community appropriate.

In the judge's words

In the usual case, a jail sentence would be warranted for this offence. I agree with the Crown that the rehabilitative aspects of sentencing and Ms. Antonius' low risk of re-offending move the balance to a CSO, a jail sentence in the community, as being appropriate to address all three sentencing principles.

1

The record

Convicted of
Prior convictions
3 prior convictions1
At the time of the offence
Not stated1
Defence asked for
Suspended sentence1
Appeal
Not yet checked
Counsel
Crown: J. Barbour
Defence: M. Hauzar

Sources

  1. R. v. Antonius, 2025 BCSC 2438 Court decision, CanLII, December 8, 2025[43] The Crown seeks a CSO for 18 months, pursuant to s. 742.1 of the Criminal Code. The CSO would include house arrest for the first six months.[44] Defence counsel firstly seeks a suspended sentence. In the alternative, defence counsel agrees that the Crown's position as to the CSO is reasonable.[1] On June 18, 2025, after a jury trial, Shiny Christy Antonius was convicted of robbery, contrary to s. 344(1)(b) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46.[31] Ms. Antonius has a criminal record. Firstly, when she was 21 years old (1997), she was convicted under the Criminal Code of driving while impaired. She received a one-year driving prohibition and a $500 fine. Secondly, when she was 22 years old (1998), she was convicted under the Criminal Code of impaired driving causing bodily harm and operating a vehicle while disqualified.[61] In the usual case, a jail sentence would be warranted for this offence. I agree with the Crown that the rehabilitative aspects of sentencing and Ms. Antonius' low risk of re-offending move the balance to a CSO, a jail sentence in the community, as being appropriate to address all three sentencing principles.[73] I impose a conditional sentence order (CSO) for a term of 18 months.
  2. Criminal Code, s. 344 Record, Justice Laws Website
  3. R. v. Antonius, 2025 BCSC 2438 Court decision, Courts of British Columbia

publicly
Sentence Watch is part of Publicly: sites built from government and court records, with every fact linked to its source. Publicly is not affiliated with any government. Visits are counted with Google Analytics, which sets cookies.