Sexual assault
R. v. A.M.
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 two counts of sexual assault committed between 2002 and 2008 against two complainants who were young children at the time. The Crown sought 12 years in custody and the defence a conditional sentence of two years less one day. Justice Russell imposed a global sentence of four years, less 1,412 days of remand credit, finding that Gladue factors reduced the offender's moral blameworthiness but that the aggravating circumstances required a federal custodial sentence.
In the judge's words
1Ultimately, despite A.M.’s diminished moral blameworthiness, I find that the numerous aggravating circumstances of this case, together with the pervasive and persistent amount of sexual abuse against vulnerable children, warrant nothing less than a federal custodial sentence.
The record
- Convicted of
- Sexual assault (CC 271, 2 counts)
- Prior convictions
- 8 prior convictions, 1 violent1
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Defence asked for
- 2 years less a day conditional sentence1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: Darcy MacPherson
Defence: David Iannetti
Sources
- R. v. A.M., 2026 NSSC 262 Court decision, CanLII, July 31, 2026
[35] The Crown seeks an exceptionally heavy sentence. It was framed in the Crown brief as 7 years custody for each count to be served consecutively (14 years). It is then reasoned to have a “reduction of one year each for totality and Gladue”. This amounts to a 12-year custodial sentence less credit for remand.
[37] A.M. seeks a conditional sentence order of two years less one day, followed by three years of probation.
[31] A.M. has a criminal record. Prior to the offences before the court, he had four convictions for impaired driving (1981, 1983, 1988, and 1989), operating while prohibited (1989), assault (1989), resisting arrest (1997), and breaching probation (1998).
[98] It is a difficult task to balance the many competing sentencing principles I have identified. I remain mindful of s. 718.2(e) and the guidance of Derrick J.A. in Cope and Knockwood. Ultimately, despite A.M.’s diminished moral blameworthiness, I find that the numerous aggravating circumstances of this case, together with the pervasive and persistent amount of sexual abuse against vulnerable children, warrant nothing less than a federal custodial sentence.
[102] The respective sentences will be served consecutively. After taking a “last look” and placing fair emphasis on section 718.2 (e) and the principles of restraint and totality, I find the six-year sentence is more than what is necessary in the circumstances to properly reflect proportionality. As a result, the total sentence will be four years (1461 days) (2 years consecutive on each s. 271 count) less remand credit (941 days X 1.5 = 1412 days). The total go-forward sentence will be 49 days.
- Criminal Code, s. 271 Record, Justice Laws Website
- R. v. A.M., 2026 NSSC 262 Court decision, Courts of Nova Scotia