Robbery, Occupant of a motor vehicle knowing there is a firearm, Breach of a release order
R. v. Anderson
Sentence and the Crown's position
What the law allows
Darcy Anderson pleaded guilty to two robberies, being an occupant of a vehicle containing a restricted firearm while bound by a firearms prohibition, and breaching a release order. The Crown and defence jointly proposed a global sentence of five years' incarceration. Justice Ormiston accepted the joint submission, finding a lengthy penitentiary sentence necessary to protect the public while giving weight to Gladue factors.
In the judge's words
1A lengthy penitentiary sentence is required to protect the public from this kind of serious offending. The proposed sentence is a significant step up from the previous carceral sentences Mr. Anderson has served. However, this increase is required to send a message both to Mr. Anderson and the general public that we cannot tolerate this kind of offending in a peaceful society.
The record
- Convicted of
- Robbery (CC 344, 2 counts)
- Occupant of a motor vehicle knowing there is a firearm (CC 94(1))
- Breach of a release order (CC 145(5))
- Prior convictions
- Not recorded
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Defence asked for
- 5 years in custody1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: A.G. Varesi
Defence: J. Killoran
Sources
- R. v. Anderson, 2026 BCSC 856 Court decision, CanLII, April 21, 2026
[1] THE COURT: Darcy Anderson is before the Court having entered guilty pleas on five offences. Crown and defence counsel jointly submit that a global sentence of five years' incarceration is a fit sentence.
[1] THE COURT: Darcy Anderson is before the Court having entered guilty pleas on five offences. Crown and defence counsel jointly submit that a global sentence of five years' incarceration is a fit sentence.
[1] THE COURT: Darcy Anderson is before the Court having entered guilty pleas on five offences.
A lengthy penitentiary sentence is required to protect the public from this kind of serious offending. The proposed sentence is a significant step up from the previous carceral sentences Mr. Anderson has served. However, this increase is required to send a message both to Mr. Anderson and the general public that we cannot tolerate this kind of offending in a peaceful society.
[20] With respect to File 115208‑2, the sentence is one day in custody, having considered 365 days of actual time served, which with time‑and‑a‑half enhanced credit is 548 days. … [21] With respect to 116224‑2, the sentence being imposed today is 199 days in custody, consecutive. The sentence I would have imposed is 365 days. I have taken into account the 111 actual days of time served, which I will consider 166 days with enhanced credit. … [22] On Indictment 116223‑2, the sentence is 180 days' incarceration, consecutive. On file 115286‑2, 730 days of incarceration, consecutive. Finally, on 115208‑5, 30 days' incarceration, concurrent.
- Criminal Code, s. 344 Record, Justice Laws Website
- R. v. Anderson, 2026 BCSC 856 Court decision, Courts of British Columbia