Supreme Court

R. v. De Boer, 2003 NWTSC 31
Date: 20030530
Docket: S-1-CR-2003000026; S-1-CR-2003000028; S-1-CR-2003000033

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES

IN THE MATTER OF:


HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN


- and -


WILLIIAM JOHN DE BOER


Transcript of the Reasons for Sentence delivered by The Honourable Justice T.P. O'Connor, sitting in Yellowknife, in the Northwest Territories, on the 29th day of May, A.D. 2003.


APPEARANCES:

Mr. P. Falvo:   Counsel for the Crown

Mr. R. Gorin:   Counsel for the Defendant


THE COURT:   William De Doer has pleaded guilty at an early stage in these proceedings to two counts of robbery and one count of assault with a weapon causing bodily harm. The three offences occurred within seven hours, in Fort Smith. They were vicious and senseless. The victims were vulnerable, innocent, and older citizens who happened to attract the attention of an intoxicated Mr. De Doer. He assaulted them with kicks and punches and took small amounts of money, and in one case, a six pack of beer.

Mr. De Boer is an 18-year-old resident of Fort Smith. He has a record comprising two thefts, possession of marijuana, and an obstruct police, all as a young offender. He has completed Grade 10 but intends to continue school to the completion of Grade 12. He holds a ticket or certificate qualifying him as a crane operator for fire and ambulance purposes.

Is that correct, Counsel?

MR. GORIN:   That's correct.

THE COURT:   He has been in custody awaiting trial for approximately six months. While in custody, he was diagnosed as suffering from depression and is now taking medication for this condition. He was depressed when he committed the offences.

I'm advised the victims received cuts and bruises and were treated at Fort Smith and apparently did not sustain permanent injuries or disabilities, nor were

[Page 1]

they required to be treated other than at Fort Smith.

Both counsel agree the nature and violence of the offences warrant a further term in custody. Crown seeks a further one to two years; the defence, one year to eighteen months.

Obviously the primary sentencing considerations in a matter of this nature are general deterrence and denunciation of the offence committed. Like-minded members of the public must know that such violent conduct will warrant a substantial term of incarceration. However, of perhaps equal importance with an offender as young as Mr. De Boer is the need for rehabilitation. Such an approach is obviously best for the offender and is probably the surest way of protecting the public from him in the future. I am sure a sentence taking into account the rehabilitation of the offender is more profitable in the long rim than harsher sentences, particularly for someone going to jail for the first time.

Accordingly, Mr. De Boer is sentenced to a term in custody of one year in addition to the credit of one year he is deemed to have already served. There will be a recommendation that he serve the one year at the South Mackenzie Correctional Centre unless the authorities there deem him to be a suicide risk, requiring his transfer to the Yellowknife Correctional Centre.

[Page 2]

The term in custody will be followed by a term of probation of two years, the terms of which will be, first, report and be under the supervision of a probation officer. Second, to live with his parents in Fort Smith and abide by their household rules and regulations. Third, abstain absolutely from the use of alcohol or any non-prescribed drugs. Next, complete his Grade 12 education within the two years of the term of probation. Next, thereafter seek and maintain employment. Next, submit to and cooperate with any counselling recommended by the probation officer. Next, take, when required, any and all medication prescribed by his physician. Next, keep the peace and be of good behaviour; and next, the other necessary statutory conditions. There will be an order that he submit to a DNA order to supply a sample of his own DNA. There will also be an order under Section 109 of the Criminal Code prohibiting possession of any firearms, ammunition, crossbows, prohibited weapons and other items mentioned in that section for a period of ten years.

Now, sir, do you understand the terms of your probation?

THE ACCUSED:  Yes, sir, I do.

THE COURT:   Will you abide by those terms?

THE ACCUSED:  Yes, I will.

THE COURT:   You understand, also, that if you

[Page 3]

breach any of those terms, you could be brought back before the Court and may be charged with an additional offence of breach of probation?

THE ACCUSED:  Yes.

THE COURT:   You understand that?

THE ACCUSED:  Yes.

THE COURT:   All right. You will have to sign some necessary papers and that will complete the matter.

Anything else, Counsel?

MR. FALVO:   Sir, I do have the written DNA order here and defence counsel has signed it. I can give you that.

MR. GORIN:   That's correct, sir. I'm not sure if it's required or not, but I'm just wondering how the sentence is broken down. Is it one year concurrent on each?

THE COURT:   Sorry. I didn't mention that. Yes, it is one year concurrent on each of the three offences.

MR. GORIN:   And the probation would be on -- Thank you.

THE COURT:   Similarly, yes.

I've just signed one. You can distribute the other copies, please.

THE COURT CLERK:  Yes, sir. Thank you.

THE COURT:   Just as a matter of interest,

[Page 4]

where is that done? Is it done here? The taking of the DNA.

THE COURT CLERK:  Yes.

THE COURT:   In the court building?

THE COURT CLERK:  No, it's taken at the RCMP, I
 believe.

THE COURT: Okay. We have an issue down south about taking DNA samples in the court building where the sentencing has occurred. We discourage it. But it's not done here, so that's fine.

Anything else, Counsel?

MR. FALVO:   No, Your Honour.

THE COURT:   Thank you.


Certified to be a true and accurate transcript, pursuant to Rules 723 and 724 of the Supreme Court Rules of Court

Jane Romanowich,
Court Reporter

[Page 5]