Jump to content

R v Gladue: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Celeron64 (talk | contribs)
m fix typo
 
(48 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|1995 Supreme Court of Canada case on sentences for Indigenous offenders}}
{{SCCInfoBox
{{SCCInfoBox
|case-name=R v Gladue
|case-name=R v Gladue
|full-case-name=Jamie Tanis Gladue v Her Majesty The Queen
|full-case-name=Jamie Tanis Gladue v Her Majesty the Queen
|heard-date=April 23, 1999
|heard-date=April 23, 1999
|decided-date=December 19, 1999
|decided-date=December 19, 1999
|citations=[1999] 1 S.C.R. 688
|citations=[https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1695/index.do [1999<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 SCR 688]
|history=
|history=
|ruling= Appeal dismissed
|ruling= Appeal dismissed
|ratio=
|ratio=
|SCC=1999-2000
|SCC=1998-1999
|Unanimous=[[Peter Cory|Cory]] and Iacobucci JJ.
|Unanimous=Cory and Iacobucci JJ
|NotParticipating=
|NotParticipating=McLachlin and Major JJ
|LawsApplied=
|LawsApplied= ''Criminal Code'', s. 718.2(e)
}}
}}'''''R v Gladue'''''<ref name=":0">[http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1695/index.do ''R v Gladue''<nowiki>, [1999] 1 SCR 688.</nowiki>]</ref> is a decision of the [[Supreme Court of Canada]] on the sentencing principles that are outlined under s. 718.2(e) of the [[Criminal Code (Canada)|Criminal Code]]. s. 718.2(e)<ref name=":1" /> directs the courts to take into account the history of the offender, "with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders", and also directs the courts to seek, "all available sanctions, other than imprisonment".<ref name=":0" />
'''''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'']]. That provision, enacted by Parliament in 1995, directs the courts to take into consideration "all available sanctions, other than imprisonment" for all offenders. It adds that the courts are to pay "particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders".
==Background==
On September 16, 1995, Jamie Tanis Gladue, a young Indigenous woman, was celebrating her 19th birthday with some friends in [[Nanaimo, British Columbia]]. She suspected that her boyfriend was having an affair with her older sister. Following a confrontation, her boyfriend repeatedly insulted Gladue, at which point she stabbed him in the chest. Jaime Tanis Gladue was subsequently charged with manslaughter and was sentenced to three years imprisonment.<ref name=":2" />


''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).
At Jaime Tanis Gladue’s sentencing hearing the judge took into account many aggravating factors. The court also took into account the absence of any serious criminal history. The court did not take into consideration Jaime Gladue’s traumatic past, such as the fact that Jaime Gladue’s mother was killed in a car accident, when Jaime Gladue was 14 years old.<ref name=":0" /> The trial judge held that s. 718.2(e)<ref name=":1">[https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-184.html#docCont ''Criminal Code'', RSC 1985, c C-46, s 718.2(e).]</ref> did not apply to Indigenous People who were off-reserve. The [[Court of Appeal for British Columbia|British Columbia Court of Appeal]] upheld the sentence.<ref name=":2">[http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/1997/1997canlii3015/1997canlii3015.html ''R v Gladue'', 1997 CanLII 3015 (BC CA).]</ref>


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]]."
==Reasons of the court==
Justice Cory and Justice 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. In Canada, Indigenous people make up 25% of the Federal prison population, despite representing only 4% of the Canadian population. <ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2016001/article/14318/tbl/tbl05-eng.htm|title=Adult correctional statistics in Canada, 2014/2015. Table 5 Admissions to adult correctional services, by characteristic of persons admitted, type of supervision and jurisdiction, 2014/2015|last=Canada|first=Government of Canada, Statistics|website=www150.statcan.gc.ca|language=en|access-date=2018-12-03}}</ref>


In 2012, in ''[[R v Ipeelee]]'', the Supreme Court confirmed the basic principles it had set out in ''R v Gladue''.
== Challenges ==
Jaime Gladue was not on reserve land at the time of the offense and therefore her s. 718.2(e) rights were never taken into consideration. It was later noted and stated that section 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=":0" />


== 1995 Amendments to the ''Criminal Code'' ==
== Legacy ==
In 1999, the [[Gladue Court]]s and [[Gladue report]]s were created following ''R v Gladue''. Gladue reports were implemented in an attempt to lower the severe over-representation of Indigenous people within the Canadian criminal justice system. Some of the items noted on a Gladue Report include the tragic history, cultural oppression, poverty, abuse suffered and 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>


In 1995, the federal government introduced major changes to the sentencing provisions of the ''Criminal Code''. As part of that review, the package included amendments that responded to the over-representation of Indigenous peoples in the correctional systems of Canada. At that time, Indigenous peoples amounted to approximately 18% of the total of incarcerated individuals, but were only 3% of the total population of Canada, an over-representation of more than 5 times their total population.<ref>[https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/pub/85-002-x/85-002-x1997004-eng.pdf?st=ocJRczA_ "Adult Correctional Services in Canada, 1995-96" Micheline Reed and Peter Morrison, ''Juristat – Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics'', Statistics Canada – Catalogue no. 85-002-XPE Vol. 17 no. 4.]</ref>
==Important Links==

* [[List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Lamer Court)]]
The amendments included a new provision setting out general sentencing principles. The relevant provision was the new s. 718.2(1)(e):
*[[R. v. Ipeelee]]

* [[R. v. Wells]]
{{Blockquote
|text='''Other sentencing principles'''<br>
'''718.2''' A court that imposes a sentence shall also take into consideration the following principles:<br>
:...<br>
:(e) all available sanctions, other than imprisonment, that are reasonable in the circumstances and consistent with the harm done to victims or to the community should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders.<ref>{{Cite canlaw|short title =Criminal Code|abbr =RSC|year =1985|chapter =C-46|section =718.2|subsection =1|link =https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-718.2.html}}, as enacted by SC 1995, c. 22, s. 6.</ref>}}

== Facts of the case ==

On September 16, 1995, Jamie Tanis Gladue, a young Indigenous woman, was celebrating her birthday with some friends in [[Nanaimo]], [[British Columbia]]. She suspected that her boyfriend was having an affair with her older sister. Following a confrontation, her boyfriend repeatedly insulted Gladue, at which point she stabbed him in the chest. He died. At the time of the stabbing, Gladue had a blood alcohol level of between 155 and 165 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood.<ref name=SCC>[http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1695/index.do ''R v Gladue''<nowiki>, [1999] 1 SCR 688.</nowiki>]</ref>

== 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=BCCA>[http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/1997/1997canlii3015/1997canlii3015.html ''R v Gladue'', 1997 CanLII 3015 (BC CA).]</ref>

At Gladue's sentencing hearing, the sentencing judge took into account both aggravating and mitigating factors, including the absence of any serious criminal history. However, the sentencing judge did not take into account any factors specifically relating to Gladue's Indigenous background.<ref name=SCC>[http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1695/index.do ''R v Gladue''<nowiki>, [1999] 1 SCR 688.</nowiki>]</ref> The sentencing judge also held that s. 718.2(e) did not apply to Indigenous people who were off-reserve. The [[Court of Appeal for British Columbia|British Columbia Court of Appeal]] disagreed with the sentencing judge on that point, but by a 2-1 judgment, upheld the sentence.<ref name=BCCA/> Both the sentencing judge and the majority of the Court of Appeal held that the offence was a serious one, and that a three year sentence was appropriate in any event, even if the Indigenous background were taken into account.<ref name=BCCA/>

==Reasons of the Supreme Court==

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=SCC/>

== Gladue reports ==
{{main|Gladue report}}
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]]
*[[Healing lodge]]
*[[Indigenous Peoples and the Canadian Criminal Justice System]]
* [[Gladue report|Gladue Report]] and process for application of "Gladue principles"
* [[List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Lamer Court)]]
*[[Gladue Court]]
*''[[R v Ipeelee]]''
* ''[[R v Wells]]''


==Notes==
== References ==
{{reflist}}
<references/>


{{DEFAULTSORT:Gladue}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Gladue}}

Latest revision as of 21:27, 4 June 2023

R v Gladue
Supreme Court of Canada
Hearing: April 23, 1999
Judgment: December 19, 1999
Full case nameJamie Tanis Gladue v Her Majesty the Queen
Citations[1999] 1 SCR 688
RulingAppeal dismissed
Court membership
Chief Justice: Antonio Lamer
Puisne Justices: Claire L'Heureux-Dubé, Charles Gonthier, Peter Cory, Beverley McLachlin, Frank Iacobucci, John C. Major, Michel Bastarache, Ian Binnie
Reasons given
Unanimous reasons byCory and Iacobucci JJ
McLachlin and Major JJ took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Laws applied
Criminal Code, s. 718.2(e)

R v Gladue is a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the sentencing principles that are outlined under s. 718.2(e) of the Criminal Code. That provision, enacted by Parliament in 1995, directs the courts to take into consideration "all available sanctions, other than imprisonment" for all offenders. It adds that the courts are to pay "particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders".

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

[edit]

In 1995, the federal government introduced major changes to the sentencing provisions of the Criminal Code. As part of that review, the package included amendments that responded to the over-representation of Indigenous peoples in the correctional systems of Canada. At that time, Indigenous peoples amounted to approximately 18% of the total of incarcerated individuals, but were only 3% of the total population of Canada, an over-representation of more than 5 times their total population.[1]

The amendments included a new provision setting out general sentencing principles. The relevant provision was the new s. 718.2(1)(e):

Other sentencing principles

718.2 A court that imposes a sentence shall also take into consideration the following principles:

...
(e) all available sanctions, other than imprisonment, that are reasonable in the circumstances and consistent with the harm done to victims or to the community should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders.[2]

Facts of the case

[edit]

On September 16, 1995, Jamie Tanis Gladue, a young Indigenous woman, was celebrating her birthday with some friends in Nanaimo, British Columbia. She suspected that her boyfriend was having an affair with her older sister. Following a confrontation, her boyfriend repeatedly insulted Gladue, at which point she stabbed him in the chest. He died. At the time of the stabbing, Gladue had a blood alcohol level of between 155 and 165 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood.[3]

Lower court decisions

[edit]

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.[4]

At Gladue's sentencing hearing, the sentencing judge took into account both aggravating and mitigating factors, including the absence of any serious criminal history. However, the sentencing judge did not take into account any factors specifically relating to Gladue's Indigenous background.[3] The sentencing judge also held that s. 718.2(e) did not apply to Indigenous people who were off-reserve. The British Columbia Court of Appeal disagreed with the sentencing judge on that point, but by a 2-1 judgment, upheld the sentence.[4] Both the sentencing judge and the majority of the Court of Appeal held that the offence was a serious one, and that a three year sentence was appropriate in any event, even if the Indigenous background were taken into account.[4]

Reasons of the Supreme Court

[edit]

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 Cory and 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".[3]

Gladue reports

[edit]

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 reports. Some of the items included in Gladue reports include the tragic history, cultural oppression, poverty, abuse suffered and residential school attendance of the Indigenous offender.[5]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "Adult Correctional Services in Canada, 1995-96" Micheline Reed and Peter Morrison, Juristat – Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada – Catalogue no. 85-002-XPE Vol. 17 no. 4.
  2. ^ Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c. C-46, s. 718.2(1) , as enacted by SC 1995, c. 22, s. 6.
  3. ^ a b c R v Gladue, [1999] 1 SCR 688.
  4. ^ a b c R v Gladue, 1997 CanLII 3015 (BC CA).
  5. ^ "English | Gladue Sentencing Principles". gladueprinciples.editmy.website. Retrieved 2018-12-03.