Court of Appeal

Decision Information

R. v. Barkhouse

Court Court of Appeal
Date 2000-05-16
Citation 2000 NSCA 65
Docket CAC 161177
Judge/Registrar/Adjudicator Bateman, Nancy J. (Honourable Justice) (CA); Chipman, David (Honourable Justice); Roscoe, Elizabeth A. (Honourable Justice) (CA)
Document Type Library Sheet
Relations Decision - R. v. Barkhouse - 2000 NSCA 65 - 2000-05-16 - Decision

Decision Content

CASE NO.                                     VOL. NO.                                            PAGE

 

 

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN                         - and -                                                                               RODNEY CARL BARKHOUSE

                                                                                                                                                           

(Appellant)                                                                                                                  (Respondent)

 

                                                                             

CAC161177                                             Halifax, N.S.                                        CHIPMAN, J.A.

                                                                                                                                                (Orally)    

                                         [Cite as: R. v. Barkhouse, 2000 NSCA 65 ]

 

APPEAL HEARD:                                 May 16, 2000

 

JUDGMENT DELIVERED:                 May 16, 2000

 

WRITTEN RELEASE OF ORAL:       May 24, 2000

 

 

SUBJECT:         Criminal Law - Sentencing

 

SUMMARY:        The Crown appealed from conditional sentences of imprisonment totalling 18 months imposed in Provincial Court upon the respondent for convictions for break and enter and possession of stolen goods.

 

ISSUE:                Whether the sentence was unfit.

 

RESULT:            The court referred to the principles governing appeals from sentence as discussed in such cases as R. v. Shropshire (1995), 102 C.C.C. 193 and R. v. Cormier (1974), 9 N.S.R. (2d) 687. The court concluded that there had not been any error made by the trial judge in the principles of sentencing. The appeal was dismissed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

        This information sheet does not form part of the court’s judgment.  Quotes must be from the judgment, not this cover sheet.  The full court judgment consists of one page.

 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.