R v Cannon

The respondent, Cannon, appealed against his sentence in the Court of Appeal, following his conviction for home invasion offences and subsequent conviction for attempting to procure the commission of a criminal act. The Court was required to determine whether the pre-sentence custody Cannon served on remand should be taken into account in calculating the sentence for the attempted procurement offence and whether the sentence was manifestly excessive. The Court also had to consider whether the sentence was appropriate in light of the fact that the home invasion sentence had been set aside.

The Court of Appeal found that the pre-sentence custody should be taken into account in calculating the sentence for the attempted procurement offence. The Court held that the sentencing judge's failure to take into account the pre-sentence custody resulted in a manifestly excessive sentence. The Court further found that the sentence was inappropriate because the home invasion sentence had been set aside. The Court concluded that the sentence imposed for the attempted procurement offence should be suspended forthwith, rather than after serving a period of 12 months imprisonment, and that the sentence should not be served cumulatively with the home invasion sentence.

The Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal against sentence and allowed the appeal. The Court varied the sentence imposed at first instance by deleting the order that the term of imprisonment be suspended after serving a period of 12 months imprisonment and by deleting the order that the sentence be served cumulatively. The Court ordered that the term of imprisonment be suspended forthwith and that the sentence not be served cumulatively with the home invasion sentence.