Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content




R. v. Hiebert, 2002 NWTSC 66
Date: 20021004
Docket: S-1-CR-2002000078

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES


HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN


VS.


JAMES GUY HIEBERT


Transcript of Reasons for Judgment held before The Honourable Justice J. Z. Vertes at Hay River, Northwest Territories, on the 18th day of September, A.D. 2002.


J. Burke, Esq.   Appeared for the Crown

G. Hiebert, Esq.   Appeared on his Own Behalf

D. Boucher,   Court Reporter


(Charged under Section 253(b) of The Criminal Code)

[Page 1]

THE COURT:   In this case the Crown has appealed the sentence imposed on the Respondent who pled guilty to a charge of operating a motor vehicle while his blood alcohol level exceeded 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 milliliters of blood contrary to S.253(B) of the Criminal Code.

The sentence imposed by the Justice of the Peace was a fine of $600 plus the usual victims of crime fine surcharge and one year probation. The Justice of the Peace declined to impose a driving prohibition as required by S.259(1)(a) of the Criminal Code.

It appears that the Justice of the Peace was motivated first by some concerns about Mr. Hiebert's personal circumstances and second by the mistaken impression that the prosecution was under a requirement to serve notice of the demand for a driving prohibition.

There is no notice requirement for a driving prohibition and indeed the Criminal Code makes such a driving prohibition mandatory even on a first offence, even on a first offender. And the Criminal Code provides that the driving prohibition must be of a minimum of one year. There is no discretion, either in the Justice of the Peace or in this Court, to waive that requirement.

[Page 2]

So while I can appreciate some of the concerns that led the Justice of the Peace to forgo imposing a driving prohibition in this particular case, it is clear that the Justice of the Peace erred in law and the appeal must be allowed. Therefore, the sentence is varied by adding to it a driving prohibition for a period of one year.

My Order, however, will be stayed until October 15th, 2002. The Order will not take effect until that date. The one year driving prohibition will commence on that date and last for one full year from that date.

I direct the Respondent, Mr. Hiebert, to forward his Driver's Licence to the Clerk of the Territorial Court here in Hay River on that date either in person or by mail so that the Territorial Clerk can comply with the usual procedures in forwarding the licence to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles.

I remind Mr. Hiebert that this is in addition to the rest of the sentence that the Justice of the Peace imposed which, under the circumstances, the various items of the disposition, the fine and the probation period, seem to me to be quite appropriate and will remain in full force.

[Page 3]

Mr. Burke, I ask that you prepare a formal Order including the proviso for the stay and the effective date of the prohibition. The Order may be filed without the need of obtaining Mr. Hiebert's approval as to form and content.

MR. BURKE:   Thank you, Your Honour.

THE COURT:   I should say, Mr. Hiebert, that if by any chance you are charged with a criminal offence, particularly a drinking and driving offence between now and October 15th, the Crown will have leave to apply forthwith to me without notice to you to lift the stay. Am I making myself clear?

MR. HIEBERT:  Yes.

THE COURT:   So your Driver's Licence is still effective until October 15th, Mr. Hiebert, and then the prohibition will take effect on that date.

MR. HIEBERT:  You will be sending a transcript to Beatrice Lepine?

THE COURT:   Yes, a transcript of my Reasons for Judgement.

MR. HIEBERT:  Am I done, then?

THE COURT:   You are done. Thank you.

(MATTER ADJOURNED)

[Page 4]

I, David Boucher, Court Reporter, hereby certify that I attended the above-mentioned Matter and took faithful and accurate shorthand notes, and the foregoing is a true and accurate transcript of my shorthand notes to the best of my skill and ability.

Dated at the City of Calgary, Province of Alberta, this 26th day of September, A.D. 2002.

David Boucher C.S.R. (A)

[Page 5]


   
 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.