1. What is the proper citation for the case you have chosen? Who are the parties to the appeal and what is each of their role in the appeal? What category of law does the case fall into and how do you know that? R v. Roberts, 2007 ON CA 64 is the proper citation for this case. There are two parties listed for the appeal. Her Majesty the Queen, represented by Howard Leibovich, is the appellant and Ronald Roberts, represented by Clayton Ruby and Daniel Brodsky, is the respondent. This case falls into the criminal category of law. We know this because the case is between the Crown, representing society, and an ‘accused’ in comparison to the case being between two individuals. Another way we know that this is a criminal case is because the criminal system is used when a person is accused of doing something wrong and should be punished. In the original trial for this case Ronald Roberts was charged with aggravated assault under section 265.1 of the Criminal Code and was convicted.
2. What was the ruling of the court at the trial level?
The ruling of the court at the trial level was conviction. Roberts was “convicted by Keenen J., sitting without a jury, of aggravated assault and possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose.” (R v. Roberts, p 5) The sentence was postponed, however, from 2001 to 2004, because of a pending application submitted by the Crown. The application was to submit Roberts to psychiatric testing to determine if he would be convicted as a dangerous offender under section 753 of the Criminal Code or a long-term offender under section 753.1 of the Criminal Code. The application was approved and the assessment of Roberts proceeded. The sentencing judge, LaForme J., found that Roberts never fit the criteria to be a dangerous or long-term offender as described in the Criminal Code and he found that Roberts would not be sentenced as such. Roberts was sentenced to “two years less a day plus three years probation on terms requiring submission to...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document