SELECTED CASE LAW
In 2004 NSCA 69, Mr. S was convicted of three counts of breaching his probation. He had received a conditional sentence that included an order not to contact his ex-wife, Ms. S and his daughter. Mr. S had a history of convictions of harassment, breaching probation, and failure to comply with a recognizance. The victims of these crimes had been his former wife or daughter. In 2003 he was found guilty of breaching a no contact order, breaching recognizance, and making harassing phone calls. He made 35 calls to his daughter, many of which were foul and aggressive.
The breaches of recognizance and harassing phone calls were sentenced together. Mr. S was sentenced to 6 months’ imprisonment and two years’ probation. He appealed his conviction and sentence on all counts arguing that he did not have counsel at the trial, did not have a fair trial, and that the sentence was excessive. The appeal was dismissed in part because Mr. S was familiar with the nature of the offences and the criminal justice system due to his prior criminal history, and that the judge provided him with appropriate assistance in the trial. The sentence was not found to be excessive and was not appropriate to be served in the community, as Mr. S’ previous community-based sentences had not deterred him from harassing his ex-wife and daughter.
Also see: 2003 NSCA 118 (Release pending appeal)
Criminal Offence(s): Harassing Communications