Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post

troutman · 05-05-2017, 03:23 PM

https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/do...12abqb151.html

The Court of Appeal created three categories of moral culpability for manslaughter: the lowest category, where there is a risk of bodily injury; the middle category, where there is a risk of serious bodily injury, and the highest category, where there is a risk of life-threatening injury. In addition to the objective risk of bodily injury, sentencing courts are directed to consider evidence of subjective awareness of the risk of injury (para. 17), and a range of other factors, including the use of a weapon, the degree of force, violence or brutality, the degree of deliberation or planning, provocation, the time involved, and the element of chance in the resulting death (para. 19).

This review of case law demonstrates that the “middle category” of manslaughter cases set out in Laberge covers a broad range of circumstances and therefore a wide range of sentences. The low end of the range is generally about 3.5 or 4 years’ imprisonment, although there are cases, such as Tabbara and Braune, where sentences of 2 or 3 years were imposed. The higher end of the range is generally about 6 or 7 years, although again there are unusual cases where higher sentences have been imposed. The higher end of the range has mostly been applied where there were weapons involved or prolonged and extreme violence.

This case would seem to fall between the middle and highest category?

05-05-2017, 03:23 PM	#282
troutman Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Crowsnest Pass Exp:	https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/do...12abqb151.html The Court of Appeal created three categories of moral culpability for manslaughter: the lowest category, where there is a risk of bodily injury; the middle category, where there is a risk of serious bodily injury, and the highest category, where there is a risk of life-threatening injury. In addition to the objective risk of bodily injury, sentencing courts are directed to consider evidence of subjective awareness of the risk of injury (para. 17), and a range of other factors, including the use of a weapon, the degree of force, violence or brutality, the degree of deliberation or planning, provocation, the time involved, and the element of chance in the resulting death (para. 19). This review of case law demonstrates that the “middle category” of manslaughter cases set out in Laberge covers a broad range of circumstances and therefore a wide range of sentences. The low end of the range is generally about 3.5 or 4 years’ imprisonment, although there are cases, such as Tabbara and Braune, where sentences of 2 or 3 years were imposed. The higher end of the range is generally about 6 or 7 years, although again there are unusual cases where higher sentences have been imposed. The higher end of the range has mostly been applied where there were weapons involved or prolonged and extreme violence. This case would seem to fall between the middle and highest category?