Possessing child sexual abuse material
R. v. Perez
- Below the Crown's ask
Sentence and the Crown's position
What the law allows
Daniel Ros Perez pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography, a collection of 1,741 files. The Crown sought 15 to 18 months in jail; the defence sought a conditional sentence of two years less a day. Justice Morellato imposed eight months in jail followed by two years of probation, finding that his mitigating circumstances, including no criminal record, his guilty plea and remorse, made the Crown's range unfit, but that a conditional sentence would not meet denunciation and deterrence.
In the judge's words
1In the final analysis, I am of the view that a term of incarceration is essential having regard to the principal of proportionality, weighing the seriousness of Mr. Perez's offence with his moral blameworthiness and having regard to the aggravating and mitigating factors. In this light, and giving primacy to the principles of general deterrence and denunciation, I am firmly of the view that an eight-month jail term is a fit and proportionate one, consistent with the circumstances before me.
The record
- Convicted of
- Possessing child sexual abuse material (CC 163.1(4))
- Prior convictions
- 0 prior convictions1
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Defence asked for
- 2 years less a day conditional sentence1
- Mandatory minimum
- Found unconstitutional or not applied under a binding ruling1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: B. Bellrichard
Defence: G. Verdurmen
Sources
- R. v. Perez, 2026 BCSC 1480 Court decision, CanLII, June 30, 2026
[3] The Crown's seeks a sentence of 15 to18 months in jail and 36 months of probation with conditions, as well as a DNA order, a SOIRA order for 20 years, a victim fine surcharge of $200, and forfeiture of the offence property.
[4] The defence submits that Mr. Perez should receive a jail sentence of two years less a day, to be served in the community by way of a s. 742 conditional sentence order under the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, followed by a two-year period of probation or, alternatively, a three-year period of probation with community service.
[53] In R. v. Hamlin, 2019 BCSC 2266, Justice Winteringham, as she then was, struck down as unconstitutional the one-year mandatory minimum sentence under s. 163.1(4)(a).
[1] Mr. Daniel Ros Perez has pleaded guilty to a single count of Possession of Child Pornography occurring from May 29, 2022 to October 12, 2022.
[64] I have also considered the following mitigating factors in Mr. Perez's case: … 1) As noted earlier in these Reasons, Mr. Perez is 57 years old with no criminal record.
[75] In the final analysis, I am of the view that a term of incarceration is essential having regard to the principal of proportionality, weighing the seriousness of Mr. Perez's offence with his moral blameworthiness and having regard to the aggravating and mitigating factors. In this light, and giving primacy to the principles of general deterrence and denunciation, I am firmly of the view that an eight-month jail term is a fit and proportionate one, consistent with the circumstances before me.
[84] Having regard to the gravity of the offence you have committed, your particular circumstances, the applicable sentencing principles and the prevailing authorities, I sentence you as follows: … On the single count of possession of child pornography, I sentence you to eight months in jail, followed by two years of probation.
- R. v. Perez, 2026 BCSC 1480 Court decision, Courts of British Columbia