R. v. Anderson (C.G.), (2011) 380 Sask.R. 301 (PC)

• Judge: Toth, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: December 01, 2011
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2011), 380 Sask.R. 301 (PC);2011 SKPC 172

R. v. Anderson (C.G.) (2011), 380 Sask.R. 301 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2011] Sask.R. TBEd. DE.010

Her Majesty the Queen v. Clinton Garth Anderson

(Information Nos. 24296593; 44453866; 6793139; 7175955; 7178305; 2011 SKPC 172)

Indexed As: R. v. Anderson (C.G.)

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Toth, P.C.J.

December 1, 2011.

Summary:

The accused pled guilty to two offences: impaired driving (two counts) and failure to stop; and to three traffic violations: operating an unregistered vehicle and driving while suspended (two tickets).

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court denied the accused's request for a curative discharge on the impaired driving counts under s. 255(5) of the Criminal Code. The accused was sentenced as follows: impaired driving count one, six months' imprisonment; impaired driving count two, three months, consecutive; failure to stop, three months concurrent: operating an unregistered vehicle, $520 fine; driving while suspended count one, $500 fine; and driving while suspended count two, $1,000 fine.

Criminal Law - Topic 4434

Procedure - Verdicts - Discharges and dismissals - Discharge conditional upon curative treatment - The accused pled guilty to two offences: impaired driving (two counts) and failure to stop; and to three traffic violations: operating an unregistered vehicle and driving while suspended (two tickets) - He had six previous driving over .08 or impaired driving convictions - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court denied the accused's request for a curative discharge on the impaired driving counts under s. 255(5) of the Criminal Code - The accused was in need of curative treatment - However, he had not established bona fides - While he had sought treatment and appeared motivated, he had not attempted to address his alcohol problem until he was faced with potential incarceration - Nor had he fully embraced the treatment model - Without changes to his treatment plan, he would likely relapse - Further, the accused's criminal record could not be denied - A curative discharge was contrary to the public interest - Regarding the appropriate sentence, the court noted a sizeable gap since the last conviction, the guilty pleas and that the accused had sought treatment - The accused was sentenced as follows: impaired driving count one, six months' imprisonment; impaired driving count two, three months, consecutive; failure to stop, three months concurrent: operating an unregistered vehicle, $520 fine; driving while suspended count one, $500 fine; and driving while suspended count two, $1,000 fine.

Criminal Law - Topic 5842

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Previous criminal offences (incl. repeat, dangerous or long-term offenders) - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4434 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5849.13

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Drinking and driving offences - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4434 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5886

Sentence - Impaired driving - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4434 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5865.2

Sentence - Failure to stop a motor vehicle pursued by police (flight or evading police) - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4434 ].

Motor Vehicles - Topic 4325

Offences - Sentence - Driving while suspended - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4434 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Ahenakew (S.D.) (2005), 269 Sask.R. 166; 357 W.A.C. 166; 2005 SKCA 93, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Ashberry and Mills (1989), 30 O.A.C. 376; 47 C.C.C.(3d) 138 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Beaulieu (1980), 21 A.R. 120; 53 C.C.C.(2d) 342 (N.W.T.S.C.), refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Lohnes (B.R.) (2007), 251 N.S.R.(2d) 382; 802 A.P.R. 382; 2007 NSCA 24, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Mantee (T.B.) (2005), 275 Sask.R. 114; 365 W.A.C. 114; 2005 SKCA 147, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Redding (D.K.) (2009), 330 Sask.R. 10; 2009 SKPC 33, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Sandfly (G.) (2010), 355 Sask.R. 130; 2010 SKPC 39, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Soosay (M.D.) (2001), 293 A.R. 292; 257 W.A.C. 292; 2001 ABCA 287, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Storr (R.L.) (1995), 174 A.R. 65; 102 W.A.C. 65 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Weisgerber (R.) (2009), 340 Sask.R. 298; 2009 SKPC 107, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Welch (N.M.) (2011), 369 Sask.R. 239; 2011 SKPC 6, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Anaquod (E.G.) (2005), 269 Sask.R. 298; 357 W.A.C. 298; 2005 SKCA 109, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Bear (D.) (2007), 302 Sask.R. 153; 411 W.A.C. 153; 53 M.V.R.(5th) 165; 2007 SKCA 127, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Croswell (J.) (2002), 218 Sask.R. 289; 2002 SKQB 179, affd. (2002), 227 Sask.R. 137; 287 W.A.C. 137; 2002 SKCA 114, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Desjarlais (G.W.), [2011] Sask.R. Uned. 47; 2011 SKPC 41, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Frank (R.R.) (2005), 257 Sask.R. 266; 342 W.A.C. 266; 2005 SKCA 47, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Hotomanie (L.) (2001), 207 Sask.R. 241; 247 W.A.C. 241; 2001 SKCA 65, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Joyea (L.J.) (2004), 241 Sask.R. 178; 313 W.A.C. 178; 2004 SKCA 17, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Pawliw (A.J.) (2006), 289 Sask.R. 1; 382 W.A.C. 1; 2006 SKCA 51, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Sawatzky (G.L.) (2008), 340 Sask.R. 60; 2008 SKPC 85, refd to. [para. 2].

Counsel:

C.R. Hottinger, for the Crown;

A.A. Fox, Q.C., for the accused.

This matter was heard at Regina, Saskatchewan, by Toth, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who delivered the following sentencing decision on December 1, 2011.