Sexual assault
R. v. H.C.D.
A publication ban applies. The offender is not named.
- Below the Crown's ask
Sentence and the Crown's position
What the law allows
The offender pleaded guilty to sexual assault, prosecuted by indictment. The Crown sought two years less a day in jail followed by two years of probation; the defence sought a conditional sentence of the same length. Justice Dley found a conditional sentence unavailable because of the aggravating circumstances and imposed 18 months in prison followed by three years of probation, citing significant mitigating factors including the guilty plea, genuine remorse, no criminal history and a low risk to reoffend.
In the judge's words
1But for the significant mitigating circumstances, the sentence proposed by the Crown would be appropriate. However, the strength of the mitigating circumstances militates in favour of Mr. H.C.D. receiving a lesser custodial term, together with rehabilitation measures that will satisfy the ultimate objective, which is to protect the public.
The record
- Convicted of
- Sexual assault (CC 271)
- Prior convictions
- 0 prior convictions1
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Defence asked for
- 2 years less a day conditional sentence1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: B.G. Oros
Defence: W.M. Finch K.C.
Sources
- R. v. H.C.D., 2025 BCSC 450 Court decision, CanLII, January 27, 2025
[12] The Crown seeks a jail sentence of two years less a day, to be followed by two years of probation.
[13] Mr. H.C.D. does not take issue with the orders sought by the Crown, save and except for the imposition of a jail sentence and the SOIRA order. Mr. H.C.D. is agreeable to the length of the proposed sentence, provided it can be served in the community pursuant to a Conditional Sentence Order.
[30] Mr. H.C.D. has been a model citizen, but for this offence. He has no criminal history.
[66] But for the significant mitigating circumstances, the sentence proposed by the Crown would be appropriate. However, the strength of the mitigating circumstances militates in favour of Mr. H.C.D. receiving a lesser custodial term, together with rehabilitation measures that will satisfy the ultimate objective, which is to protect the public.
[67] I therefore conclude that a fit sentence is one of 18 months in prison followed by a probation order for a period of three years.
- Criminal Code, s. 271 Record, Justice Laws Website
- R. v. H.C.D., 2025 BCSC 450 Court decision, Courts of British Columbia