Sentencing and immigration consequences

R. v. Freckleton, 2016 ONCA 130:

[2]          In sentencing, an offender's individual circumstances must be taken into account. Thus, the fact that the offender faces the collateral consequence of deportation is a relevant factor: see R. v. Hamilton (2004), 72 O.R. (3d) 1 (C.A.), at para. 158. An appellate court may intervene to vary a sentence that falls within the range of fit sentences if the sentencing judge did not take into account that the sentence could result in the deportation of the offender. However, the sentence ultimately imposed must still be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of the responsibility of the offender: R. v. Pham, 2013 SCC 15, [2013] 1 S.C.R. 739, at para. 14. The Court also cautioned that the flexibility of the sentencing process should not be misused to impose an inappropriate and artificial sentence to circumvent Parliament's will: Pham, at para. 15.