Territorial Court

R. v. Giroux, 2009 NWTTC 09 T-2-CR-2007-000228 IN THE TERRITORIAL COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES IN THE MATTER OF: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN - v - GRANT WALTER GIROUX __________________________________________________________ Transcript of the Reasons for Sentence delivered by The Honourable Judge R.D. Gorin, sitting in Yellowknife, in the Northwest Territories, on the 23rd day of June, A.D. 2009. __________________________________________________________

APPEARANCES: Mr. M. Himmelman: Counsel for the Crown Mr. S. Shabala: Counsel for the Accused

(Charge under s. 348(1)(b) of the Criminal Code of Canada)

Official Court Reporters

1 THE COURT: Well, certainly I take into 2 account, as I always must, the facts of the 3 offence. Mr. Himmelman is quite correct, it is 4 an aggravating factor where an individual is 5 convicted of breaking and entering a dwelling 6 house and knew or was reckless as to whether the 7 dwelling house was occupied and used violence or 8 threats of violence to a person or property. 9 Clearly, that occurred in this particular 10 situation. 11 The violence may not have been especially 12 aggravating, but, nonetheless, there was 13 violence. He went into that dwelling house, in 14 this case a hotel room. I find that he knew that 15 someone was there. Immediately asked where the 16 drugs were, asked where the money was, and once 17 the wallet was provided to him, left. To make 18 matters worse, he came back. He came back and 19 tried to negotiate with his victim, told his 20 victim that he would return his passport to him 21 if his victim gave him the pin number for the 22 bank card he had taken. So the facts are indeed 23 aggravating. 24 There is no guilty plea. The absence of a 25 guilty plea, as counsel are very well aware, is 26 not an aggravating factor, but at the same time 27 it is indeed the absence of a highly mitigating

Official Court Reporters 1

1 factor. Had there been a guilty plea in relation 2 to this charge, I would have been inclined to 3 reduce the sentence which I am about to impose by 4 at least a factor of one-third. 5 There is as well the fact that the victim 6 was vulnerable, had poor eyesight. He is now, he 7 advises, in a chronic condition of pain. He was 8 in a condition like that before this incident, 9 but the incident in question appears to have 10 aggravated this condition. He also has 11 nightmares as a result. 12 I agree with the Crown that a substantial 13 term of imprisonment is required and that that 14 imprisonment should be, before taking into 15 account the pre-trial detention, in the 16 penitentiary range. There is also the criminal 17 record which I have to consider, and the criminal 18 record shows that there have been prior 19 convictions or findings of guilt for crimes of 20 violence and also prior convictions in relation 21 to breaking and entering and committing 22 indictable offences. At least three such 23 convictions. There is also a conviction for 24 being unlawfully in a dwelling house. I note as 25 well that in November of 2005, Mr. Giroux 26 received 12 months' imprisonment after being 27 convicted of assault with a weapon, and

Official Court Reporters 2

1 approximately one week later was convicted of 2 three counts of breaking and entering and 3 committing an indictable offence for which he 4 received four months less one day on one of the 5 break and enter convictions and eight months on 6 the other. Total being consecutive. The total 7 cumulative sentence being about two years less a 8 day. 9 There will be a firearms prohibition order. 10 In my view, it is mandatory. This was a crime of 11 violence, and it is a crime of violence for which 12 the maximum period of imprisonment exceeds ten 13 years. So there will be the required firearms 14 prohibition pursuant to Section 109 of the 15 Criminal Code. Mr. Giroux will be prohibited 16 from having in his possession any firearm, 17 prohibited device, ammunition, prohibited 18 ammunition, and explosive substance for the 19 entire period of ten years. The Crown has not 20 filed a notice of intention to seek greater 21 punishment, so it will not be for the lifetime 22 period that would otherwise be applicable. He 23 does have a prior conviction which also led to a 24 mandatory prohibition pursuant to Section 109 of 25 the Criminal Code. 26 There will also be a DNA authorization. 27 This is a primary designated offence. And there

Official Court Reporters 3

1 will be no victims of crime surcharge given the 2 hardship. 3 Were it not for the pre-trial detention, I 4 would be imposing a jail term of three and a half 5 years. That is 42 months. But I do take into 6 account the pre-trial detention. I give him 7 10 months' credit for it. There will be 32 8 months. Thirty-two months of jail for the 9 conviction of breaking and entering and 10 committing robbery. That is taking into account, 11 as I have said, the pre-trial detention. 12 My understanding, Mr. Shabala, is that 13 although I have imposed federal time, that the 14 local - that is, the territorial - department of 15 corrections has an agreement with the federal 16 department whereby individuals who are sentenced 17 to less than three years may be allowed to serve 18 their sentences in the North. I will endorse the 19 Warrant of Committal to that effect. I will 20 recommend that he be allowed to serve the jail 21 term that I have imposed here at the North Slave 22 Correctional Centre in Yellowknife, but that is 23 the best that I can do. Obviously, where he 24 serves his sentence is up to the federal 25 department of corrections. 26 Anything else in relation to this matter? 27 MR. HIMMELMAN: Not from the Crown, Your

Official Court Reporters 4

1 Honour. Thank you. 2 THE COURT: Mr. Shabala? 3 MR. SHABALA: Nothing further, Your Honour. 4 THE COURT: Thank you, Counsel. 5 ................................. 6 7 8 Certified Pursuant to Rule 723 of the Rules of Court 9

10 11 Jane Romanowich, CSR(A), RPR 12 Court Reporter

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Official Court Reporters 5