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.