Content deleted Content added
Rescuing orphaned refs (":0" from rev 1052240830) |
m fix typo |
||
| (10 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|1995 Supreme Court of Canada case on sentences for Indigenous offenders}}
{{SCCInfoBox
|case-name=R v Gladue
Line 14:
|LawsApplied= ''Criminal Code'', s. 718.2(e)
}}
'''''R v Gladue''''' is a decision of the [[Supreme Court of Canada]] on the [[Criminal sentencing in Canada|sentencing]] principles that are outlined under s. 718.2(e) of the [[Criminal Code (Canada)|''Criminal Code'']].
''Gladue'' was the first case where the Supreme Court considered the interpretation and application of this provision. It upheld the three year sentence for manslaughter which the sentencing judge gave to Gladue, but also set out factors which the sentencing courts are to take into account in applying s. 718.2(e).
In the years since the decision, sentencing judges have directed that to assist in sentencing Indigenous offenders, pre-sentencing reports be prepared to assess the factors which the Supreme Court has identified as being considered under s. 718.2(1(e). That type of report has become known as a "[[Gladue report]]."
In 2012, in ''[[R v Ipeelee]]'', the Supreme Court confirmed the basic principles it had set out in ''R v Gladue''.
== 1995 Amendments to the ''Criminal Code'' ==
Line 33 ⟶ 39:
== Lower court decisions ==
Gladue was originally charged with second degree murder, but pled guilty to manslaughter, with the consent of the Crown prosecutor, on the basis that there was evidence of provocation. The main issue was the appropriate sentence to be imposed. She was sentenced to three years imprisonment.<ref name=
At Gladue's sentencing hearing, the sentencing judge took into account
==Reasons of the Supreme Court==
Line 41 ⟶ 47:
The Supreme Court upheld the sentence of three years, but reviewed the factors which should be considered in the new sentencing provision, s. 718.2(e). Justices [[Peter Cory|Cory]] and [[Frank Iacobucci|Iacobucci]] held that the courts below erred in taking an overly narrow approach of s. 718.2(e). The purpose of this provision is to address the historical and current problem with the severe over-representation of Indigenous people within the criminal justice system.
Gladue was not on reserve land at the time of the offence and therefore the sentencing judge held that s. 718.2(e) did not apply. The Supreme Court held that was a mistake by the sentencing court. The Court held that s. 718.2(e) applies to "all aboriginal persons wherever they reside, whether on- or off-reserve, in a large city or a rural area".<ref name=
== Gladue reports ==
Following the Supreme Court decision, sentencing courts began requiring pre-sentencing reports for aboriginal offenders, to specifically report on the factors which the Supreme Court held were required by s. 718.2(e), which Parliament had enacted in an attempt to lower the severe over-representation of Indigenous people within the Canadian criminal justice system. These reports became known as [[Gladue report]]s. Some of the items included in Gladue reports include the tragic history, cultural oppression, poverty, abuse suffered and [[Canadian Indian residential school system|residential school]] attendance of the Indigenous offender'''.'''<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://gladueprinciples.editmy.website/english|title=English {{!}} Gladue Sentencing Principles|website=gladueprinciples.editmy.website|language=en|access-date=2018-12-03}}</ref>
==See also==
* [[Gladue court]]
* [[Gladue report]]
*[[Healing lodge]]▼
*[[Indigenous Peoples and the Canadian Criminal Justice System]]▼
* [[List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Lamer Court)]]
*''[[R v Ipeelee]]''
* ''[[R v Wells]]''
▲*[[Healing lodge]]
▲*[[Gladue report]]
▲*[[Indigenous Peoples and the Canadian Criminal Justice System]]
==
{{reflist}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Gladue}}
| |||