R v RMW

In the matter of R v RMW, the respondent pleaded guilty to charges of administering poison and assault, with the victim being his 9 year old child. The Crown appealed against the inadequacy of the sentence imposed by the original sentencing judge. The sentencing judge had imposed terms of imprisonment to be served by way of an intensive corrections order. The Crown argued that the sentence was manifestly inadequate and that the sentencing judge had failed to adequately take into account the seriousness of the offending and the impact on the victim.

The court was required to determine whether the sentencing judge had erred in imposing a sentence that was manifestly inadequate. The court had to consider the nature and circumstances of the offending, the principles of sentencing, and the impact of the offending on the victim. The court also had to consider whether the sentencing judge had taken into account the rehabilitation undergone by the respondent since being sentenced and the re-establishment of a relationship with her children.

The court found that all grounds of appeal asserting error on the part of the sentencing judge were established. The court found that the sentence imposed was manifestly inadequate and that the sentencing judge had failed to adequately take into account the seriousness of the offending and the impact on the victim. However, the court took into account the rehabilitation undergone by the respondent since being sentenced and the re-establishment of a relationship with her children. The court exercised its residual discretion and dismissed the Crown appeal against inadequacy.

The court made no further orders.