The B.C. Court of Appeal has overturned a lenient sentence handed to a North Vancouver crack dealer, stating the original trial judge couldn't ignore usual sentencing standards just because she disagreed with them.
"An individual judge's opinions on the efficacy of general deterrence cannot be allowed to override established principles of sentencing," wrote Justice Harvey Groberman of the appeal court, in tossing out a sentence originally handed to drug dealer Pierre Alexandro Cisneros, 28.
Cisneros was originally handed one year's probation with a curfew for the first three months and a fine of $2,000 after pleading guilty in North Vancouver provincial court to possession of crack cocaine for the purpose of trafficking in September of 2013.
Cisneros was stopped by North Vancouver RC MP while driving a rental vehicle in the early hours of Feb. 25, 2013, according to court documents.
When Cisneros handed over this driver's licence, the officer noticed a baggy containing what appeared to be crack cocaine in his hand.
Cisneros was arrested and told he would be taken to the detachment for a strip search. At that point, Cisneros voluntarily handed over another baggie of crack hidden in his underwear. During the arrest, Cisneros' cellphone rang several times, with callers asking for drug deliveries. In a statement to police, Cisneros admitted he worked the night shift for a dial-a-dope operation to supplement his income.
The Crown prosecutor in the case argued for a jail term, noting the usual sentence for a similar offence is six to nine months in jail.
But the trial judge expressed reservations about sending Cisneros to prison, according to court documents, noting that changes to the Criminal Code meant she couldn't hand down a conditional jail sentence to be served in the community.
In handing down her sentence of probation, the trial judge made it clear she was not convinced the tough-on-crime changes "represented good sentencing policy," or would further the goals of general deterrence, according to the court documents. "This clearly affected her view of the appropriate sentence," Groberman wrote. The sentence was a "marked departure from the norm" for which there was no justification, said the appeal court.
The panel tossed out probationary term and handed out a six-month jail sentence in its place.
