Supreme Court

             R. v. Harris, 2007 NWTSC 76



                                                 S-1-CR2007000010

             IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES



             IN THE MATTER OF:





                             HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN





                                  - vs. -





                             CHRISTOPHER HARRIS



             _________________________________________________________

             Transcript of the Reasons for Sentence by The Honourable

             Justice J.Z. Vertes, at Yellowknife in the Northwest

             Territories, on September 21st A.D., 2007.

             _________________________________________________________

             APPEARANCES:



             Ms. M. McGuire:                    Counsel for the Crown

             Mr. J. Chadi:                      Counsel for the Accused

                  ----------------------------------------

             Charge under s. 95(1)(b), s.86(1) Criminal Code of Canada
             Charge under s. 5(2) Controlled Drugs and Substances Act




      Official Court Reporters








THE COURT:             In this case, the accused Christopher Harris has entered pleas of guilty to three charges:  one being the unlawful possession of a prohibited firearm contrary to Section 95(1)(b) of the Criminal Code; the second          being careless use of a firearm contrary to Section 86(1) of the Criminal Code; and the third being a charge of possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking contrary to Section 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. These charges arose from an incident on June 4th, 2006, here in the city of Yellowknife.

On that day, the accused and a friend were in his apartment and, through carelessness, the firearm discharged and the accused's friend was shot in the leg.  This led to a sequence of events highlighted by this accused's disposal of the firearm and drugs that were in his apartment. Subsequent police investigation retrieved the firearm, ammunition, as well as the drugs.

In this case, my task has been made much easier because I have been provided with a joint submission.  It is a submission developed out of a negotiated plea, one that has been negotiated over a lengthy period of time.

I am grateful to both counsel who have obviously put in a great deal of thought and effort into the resolution of this case.

The Courts give great credence to joint submissions and the general principle accepted by this Court is that a joint submission, provided in circumstances such as these, should not be lightly disregarded and only in those circumstances where the Court feels that the joint submission does not reflect an appropriate penalty.  In this case the joint submission that has been proposed to me, and in the circumstances of all that has been explained to me, I think is an appropriate one.

The accused is 24 years old.  He grew up in northern Alberta.  He appears to have a supportive family.  He has a minor prior record but he appears to be genuinely remorseful.

I do not need to repeat what has been said in other cases in this Court in the last few years about the problems caused by drugs and drug dealing in this town.  It is my hope that at least this accused will be able to find some way to put his life back on track.

Stand up, Mr. Harris.

Mr. Harris, I accept the submissions of counsel that have been proposed to me, and I impose the following sentences:

On Count 3 of the Indictment, that being the charge of possession for the purpose of trafficking, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment of two and a half years.  On Count 1, being the charge of unlawful possession of a prohibited firearm, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment of one year consecutive.  On Count 2, being the careless use of a firearm, I sentence you to a further term of one year but that will be concurrent.  The total sentence is three and a half years imprisonment.

You may sit down.

In addition, there will be an order pursuant to Section 109 of the Criminal Code prohibiting the accused from having in his possession any firearms or ammunition for a period of ten years from the date of his release.

Is there anything else that I have neglected, Ms. McGuire?

MS. McGUIRE:           No, Your Honour.

THE COURT:             Mr. Chadi?

MR. CHADI:             Victim Fine surcharge?

THE COURT:             Under the circumstances, the Victim of Fine surcharge will be waived.

MR. CHADI:             I take it that the Crown seeks forefeiture of all of the offence-related property?

MS. McGUIRE:           The weapon is forfeit automatically and I don't think an order is necessary for that.

MR. CHADI:             There is a number of items that were seized other than the drugs and the weapon and the ammunition.  I take it there shouldn't be an issue for retrieval once Mr. Harris has resolved his matters and is out of custody?

MS. McGUIRE:           His personal items, there is no problem with those being returned.

MR. CHADI:             Thank you.

THE COURT:             In that case, any personal items that are not related to the offences can be returned to Mr. Harris at the appropriate time.

MR. CHADI:             Thank you, sir.

THE COURT:             Anything else, counsel?

MS. McGUIRE:           No, thank you, Your Honour.

THE COURT:             Once again, thank you for your submissions.

MR. CHADI:             Thank you.

------------------------------------

Certified to be a true and
accurate transcript pursuant
to Rules 723 and 724 of the
Supreme Court Rules,
____________________________
Lois Hewitt, CSR(A), RPR, CRR
Court Reporter