Sexual assault
R. v. A. (E. L.)
A publication ban applies. The offender is not named.
Sentence and the Crown's position
What the law allows
The offender was convicted after trial of sexually assaulting a complainant who was unconscious or heavily intoxicated. The Crown sought three to four years in a penitentiary; the defence sought time served or, alternatively, two to three years. Justice Saunders imposed three years, less 348 days of credit for pre-sentence custody, finding that Gladue factors reduced the offender's moral blameworthiness but did not take the sentence below the conventional range given the aggravating circumstances and lack of remorse.
In the judge's words
1In the case of Mr. A, I conclude that his diminished moral blameworthiness does not bring the appropriate sentence outside the conventional range or down to the lower end of the range. I come to this conclusion for two reasons. First, while Mr. A's personal responsibility is reduced, a significant penitentiary term of imprisonment is still proportionate given the seriousness of the offence, the aggravating circumstances, and the lack of remorse.
The record
- Convicted of
- Sexual assault (CC 271)
- Prior convictions
- Not recorded
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Defence asked for
- 348 days in custody1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: D. Schecter
Defence: S.L. Reed (as agent for C.L. Hodson)
Sources
- R. v. A. (E. L.), 2026 BCSC 342 Court decision, CanLII, January 16, 2026
[22] The Crown seeks a penitentiary sentence of three to four years along with a number of ancillary orders.
[22] … Mr. A asks for a sentence of time served so that he could be immediately returned to the community and hopefully begin a process of re‑engagement with his culture. … [25] A period of 232 real days attributable to the subject offence. With conventional credit for time served of one-and-a-half days for each day in custody, a time-served order would amount to just under a year, 348 days.
[48] In the case of Mr. A, I conclude that his diminished moral blameworthiness does not bring the appropriate sentence outside the conventional range or down to the lower end of the range. I come to this conclusion for two reasons. First, while Mr. A's personal responsibility is reduced, a significant penitentiary term of imprisonment is still proportionate given the seriousness of the offence, the aggravating circumstances, and the lack of remorse.
[49] The fit sentence here is a term of imprisonment of three years. Giving credit for 348 days, Mr. A will serve a sentence of two years, 17 days.
- Criminal Code, s. 271 Record, Justice Laws Website
- R. v. A. (E. L.), 2026 BCSC 342 Court decision, Courts of British Columbia