Supreme Court
Decision Information
Decision information:
Abstract: Transcript of the Reasons for Sentence
Decision Content
R. v. Jones, 2011 NWTSC 13 S-1-CR-2010-000127 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES IN THE MATTER OF: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN - v - CHRISTOPHER JONES __________________________________________________________ Transcript of the Reasons for Sentence delivered by The Honourable Justice W. Darichuk, sitting in Yellowknife, in the Northwest Territories, on the 16th day of March, A.D. 2011. __________________________________________________________ APPEARANCES: Ms. J. Walsh and Mr. D. Praught: Counsel for the Crown Mr. T. Boyd: Counsel for the Accused (Charge under s. 343(b) of the Criminal Code of Canada) Official Court Reporters 1 THE COURT: Good afternoon, everyone. 2 MR. PRAUGHT: Good afternoon, Your Honour. 3 MR. BOYD: Good afternoon, Your Honour. 4 MS. WALSH: Good afternoon, sir. 5 THE COURT: Just prior to his arraignment, 6 on the scheduled date for the commencement of his 7 trial before a jury, with the consent of counsel 8 for the Crown, the accused, Christopher Jones, 9 re-elected for trial without a jury and entered a 10 plea of guilty to the offence of robbery, 11 contrary to Section 343(b) of the Criminal Code 12 of Canada. 13 Given the forceful and comprehensive 14 submission of learned counsel, for the reasons 15 which follow, I am of the opinion that their 16 joint submission concerning the appropriate 17 sentence to be imposed should be favourably 18 endorsed. 19 The factual foundation for their joint 20 recommendation for a term of imprisonment of two 21 years to two and a half years is set forth in the 22 Agreed Statement of Facts filed as Exhibit S1. 23 Briefly summarized, the accused entered an 24 apartment "uninvited and located Mr. Delorme 25 sleeping on a couch in the living room." 26 Demanding his money, the accused assaulted the 27 complainant and took his laptop computer, cell Official Court Reporters 1 1 phone, and wallet. 2 Paragraph 14 of Exhibit S1 reads: 3 "Investigation further revealed 4 that in May 2009, Mr. Delorme had 5 received three ounces of crack 6 cocaine from a third party to 7 sell in the Yellowknife area. 8 Mr. Delorme believes that the 9 accused was attempting to collect 10 money for these drugs." 11 As a direct result of the assault, the 12 complainant suffered minor scrapes and bruising 13 to his face, neck, and shoulder area. 14 The fundamental principle of proportionality 15 is that a sentence must be proportionate to the 16 gravity of the offence and the degree of 17 responsibility of the offender. In the 18 imposition of sentence, the Court must be mindful 19 of its purpose and, as well, other principles 20 including those set forth in Section 718(2) of 21 the Criminal Code of Canada. Other principles 22 include a direction that a sentence should be 23 increased or decreased to account for any 24 relevant, aggravating, or mitigating 25 circumstances relating to the offence or to the 26 offender. Aside from rehabilitation, the 27 principles of particular significance in this Official Court Reporters 2 1 case are general deterrence and denunciation. 2 It is not without significance that counsel 3 have submitted a joint submission as to sentence. 4 As noted in the case of R. v. G.W.C. [2001] 5 5 W.W.R. 230 and 150 C.C.C. (3d) 513, a joint 6 submission should be given particular weight if 7 it falls within the acceptable range of 8 sentencing. 9 A joint submission ought not to be rejected 10 unless it is contrary to the public interest, 11 unfit, unreasonable, or would bring the 12 administration of justice into disrepute. 13 At paragraph 17, Mr. Justice Berger states: 14 "The obligation of a trial judge 15 to give serious consideration to 16 a joint sentencing submission 17 stems from an attempt to maintain 18 a proper balance between respect 19 for the plea bargain and the 20 sentencing court's role in the 21 administration of justice. The 22 certainty that is required to 23 induce accused persons to waive 24 their rights to a trial can only 25 be achieved in an atmosphere 26 where the courts do not likely 27 interfere with a negotiated Official Court Reporters 3 1 disposition that falls within or 2 is very close to the appropriate 3 range for a given offence. 'The 4 bargaining process is undermined 5 if the resulting compromise 6 recommendation is too readily 7 rejected by the sentencing 8 judge.'" 9 As the Court of Appeal observes in R. v. 10 Sears (1978), 39 C.C.C. (2d) 199: 11 "What should the offender receive 12 for this offence committed in the 13 circumstances under which it was 14 committed?" 15 The offence of robbery is one of the most 16 serious offences in the Criminal Code of Canada. 17 The gravity of this offence is such that by 18 Section 344 of this Code, a person who commits 19 this offence is liable to imprisonment for life. 20 Although this robbery does not appear to be 21 a planned and premeditated home invasion robbery 22 with an offensive weapon, it was nonetheless a 23 home invasion robbery committed by a 35-year-old 24 person with an extensive criminal record. By 25 virtue of Section 348 of the Code, his uninvited 26 entry to the apartment is deemed to be an 27 aggravating circumstance. On the other hand, his Official Court Reporters 4 1 plea of guilty to this offence is of course a 2 mitigating circumstance. In passing, I note he 3 has no prior conviction for robbery, his last 4 conviction was in January 2008, and the longest 5 period of imprisonment that he has served was six 6 months. 7 Dealing with the sanctity of an individual 8 in his or her home, the Alberta Court of Appeal 9 stated in R. v. Matwiy, [1996] A.J. No. 134, the 10 following: 11 "While offences of violence are 12 abhorrent whenever they occur, 13 offences which strike at the 14 right of members of the public to 15 the security of their own homes 16 and to freedom from intrusion 17 therein, must be treated with the 18 utmost seriousness." 19 Although a 30-month term of imprisonment 20 would appear to fall within the lower end of the 21 accepted range of sentence, given the totality of 22 the circumstances, such a sentence would not be 23 unfit, unreasonable, contrary to the public 24 interest and/or bring the administration of 25 justice into disrepute. 26 Bearing in mind that the fifteen-month 27 pre-trial custody of the accused equates with a Official Court Reporters 5 1 term of imprisonment of a twenty-two-and-one-half- 2 month sentence, the accused is sentenced to a 3 term of imprisonment of seven and one half 4 months. 5 A mandatory Section 109 firearms prohibition 6 order for life is ordered as well as a DNA order. 7 On the basis of the submission of the 8 learned defence counsel, an order is granted 9 exempting the accused from payment of the victim 10 surcharge. 11 The learned Crown attorney has submitted 12 that I exercise my common law jurisdiction to 13 bind the accused over to keep the peace and be of 14 good behaviour for a period of one year 15 subsequent to his release from imprisonment. It 16 is so ordered. 17 The penal amount of recognizance will be 18 $1,000. A further condition of the recognizance 19 is that he have no contact with Justin Delorme, 20 Andrew Hulan and/or Brennan Topilikon. 21 The imposition of a fair, fit and 22 appropriate sentence is the most difficult of all 23 judicial tasks. In closing, I would like to 24 reiterate my earlier observation concerning the 25 submissions by learned counsel. They were most 26 helpful. Thank you. 27 Unless something else remains for Official Court Reporters 6 1 resolution, this court will stand adjourned. 2 MR. PRAUGHT: Your Honour, just to be clear 3 for the record, the Crown stays Count 2. 4 THE COURT: So noted. 5 THE COURT CLERK: Your Honour, is that a 6 thousand dollars cash or no cash deposit? 7 THE COURT: No cash deposit. 8 MR. BOYD: Nothing from defence. Thank 9 you, Your Honour. 10 THE COURT: Court stands adjourned. Good 11 afternoon. 12 MS. WALSH: Thank you, sir. 13 ................................. 14 15 16 Certified Pursuant to Rule 723 of the Rules of Court 17 18 19 Jane Romanowich, CSR(A), RPR 20 Court Reporter 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Official Court Reporters 7
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.