R. v Kurt Richer Cruz

canada, canadian, case law, court opinion, canlii, pescad, 2026peca1, 2026 peca 1 (canlii), 2026, peca, 1, (canlii), s1-ca-1531, 2026, criminal and statutory offences, sexual assault, crown appeal of sentence, principles of sentencing, conditional sentence order for s. 271(1) sexual assault, whether contemporary sentencing ranges reflect modern understanding of harmfulness, proportionality and denunciation and deterrence in sexual violence sentencing, appeal allowed and sentence varied to incarceration, procedure, sentence appeal, parity analysis, appellate intervention, whether sentencing judge inappropriately calibrated parity by reference to unrelated caselaw, use of unreported reasons and joint recommendation decision in parity assessment, error in principle impacting sentence, appeal allowed and sentence set aside, criminal and statutory offences, sentencing principles, gravity of offence, modern understanding of harmfulness, whether sentencing judge failed to give effect to increased understanding of sexual assault impacts, reliance on dated authority without adjustment post, friesen, mischaracterization of objective gravity and moral blameworthiness, appeal allowed and sentence varied to incarceration, criminal and statutory offences, soira order, criminal code, s. 490.012(3) and (4), statutory presumption, evidentiary burden, whether sentencing judge erred by refusing soira without applying presumption and mandated factors, no analysis of “no connection” or “grossly disproportionate” exceptions, soira order imposed for registration requirement, procedure, standard of review, demonstrably unfit sentence, sentence variation, whether conditional sentence was demonstrably unfit warranting appellate substitution, deferential approach to sentencing judge subject to errors in principle, fit sentence determination based on aggravating and mitigating factors, appeal allowed and sentence replaced with incarceration