41431

His Majesty the King v. Harry Arthur Cope

(Nova Scotia) (Criminal) (By Leave)

It was a genuine honour and privilege to lead our litigation team for the Intervener the Empowerment Council in this important case. Mr. Cope’s matter in the Supreme Court highlights important issues in the criminal law being seriously addressed for the first time in some respects on specific points including the perceived tension between the unique methodology required in approaching sentencing of Indigenous offenders articulated in Gladue decades ago versus Parliament’s signaled intent to ensure that Indigenous women who are victims of violent crimes are not overlooked or disregarded.

The Case Summary on the Court’s Website provides the relevant background in this way:

The Indigenous respondent pleaded guilty to the aggravated assault of his Indigenous common law partner. He had a significant criminal record and a history of serious mental illness. The sentencing judge concluded the respondent’s incarceration was required to protect the public. The respondent was sentenced to five years in prison for the aggravated assault and eight months’ incarceration for breaches of release orders. A majority of the Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal the sentence, allowed the appeal, and varied the sentence to three years’ imprisonment for aggravated assault. The dissenting justice would have granted leave to appeal and dismissed the appeal.

Our wonderful counsel team on this one was Cassandra DeMelo (London, Ont), Carter Martell (TO, ON), Sarah Rankin (Calgary, Alta) and moi!

Our client’s participation focused on the role of mental health related evidence in sentencing. Our submissions are nuanced and ask the Court to give sentencing judges guidance in how to apply mental health evidence in the sentencing process.

You can find the Empowerment Council’s Factum online on the Court’s website.

You can learn more about the case generally on the SCC’s webpage for this case #41431

Empowerment Council’s Argument in Overview is reproduced below

PART I — OVERVIEW AND FACTS

1. The Empowerment Council, Systemic Advocates in Addictions and Mental Health [“the EC”] is an Ontario organization advocating on behalf of persons with addictions and mental health issues. The EC’s intervention contributes the perspective of the EC’s constituents, as the Court considers the proper approach to weighing mental health factors in the Criminal Code sentencing process.

2. The EC’s position is that sentencing courts must give meaningful consideration to mental health evidence where: (1) it is relevant to a circumstance of the offence that bears on the gravity of the offence or moral blameworthiness of the offender; or (2) it forms a significant part of the circumstances of the offender. It is not necessary for the defendant to establish both (1) and (2); either may be relevant to sentencing in distinct ways.

• 3. The EC submits that mental health factors play a unique role in the sentencing analysis. While some factors in sentencing, like youth or the presence or absence of a criminal record, have a consistent relationship to particular sentencing principles, mental health evidence plays a more complex role. It may bear upon one or more sentencing factors or principles and will often guide the assessment of which sentencing principles are most relevant. Mental health evidence does not simply correlate with a “discount” on an otherwise fit sentence: it may inform every aspect of the court’s approach to the sentencing.

4. Sentencing courts must also guard against over-reliance on the sentence range where mental health was a significant factor in the offence, given the impact a mental health crisis might have on the nature and gravity of the offence and moral blameworthiness of the defendant. In some cases, mental health evidence will weigh heavily in favour of a non-custodial sentence or a sentence outside the usual range.

ARCHIVED WEBCASTs of BOTH DAYS ARE NOW AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING

The Webcast of the two days of hearing are now available on the Court’s website as well here under, well, the Webcast Tab:

https://www.scc-csc.ca/cases-dossiers/search-recherche/41431/

Empowerment Council’s submissions begin just after the 44 minute mark on Day 2, Dec 12 2025

Amazing group of Interveners and Fantastic submissions by the inimitable Jonathan Rudin and Sarah White, who has represented Mr. Cope throughout from the trial and sentencing on all the way up. Congrats on the incredible work here by all.

My LinkedIn Post here named as many as I could find on that platform

COPE in the books in the Supreme Court of Canada | Cour suprême du Canada – terrific day of excellent submissions by all the interveners!
Just some tagged but this does not cover all. Tag your team and your friends.
Jessica Orkin K. R. Virginia Lomax Neha Chugh Anne-Marie McElroy Samara Secter Sarah Rankin Cassandra DeMelo Carter Martell Christa Big Canoe @Emily Hill Maxwell Hill Maija Martin Cassandra Richards Katherine Hensel Adam Wheeler @Naomi Metallic @Jennifer Cox Meaghan Daniel Catriona Kaiser-Derrick Adriel Weaver Nicola Langille Dylan Leiper Logan Stack Caroline Jennis Carly Peddle and of course lead counsel for the Respondent Mr. Cope @Jonathan Rudin and @Sarah White not pictured here but fantastic submissions by all. What an honour and a privilege to be part of this important case. Judgment reserved.