R. v. Bodnarchuk (M.M.), (2008) 254 B.C.A.C. 6 (CA)

• Judge: Finch, C.J.B.C., Levine and Chiasson, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: January 22, 2008
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (2008), 254 B.C.A.C. 6 (CA);2008 BCCA 39

R. v. Bodnarchuk (M.M.) (2008), 254 B.C.A.C. 6 (CA);

    426 W.A.C. 6

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2008] B.C.A.C. TBEd. FE.023

Regina (respondent) v. Mervin Michael Bodnarchuk (appellant)

(CA033147; 2008 BCCA 39)

Indexed As: R. v. Bodnarchuk (M.M.)

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Finch, C.J.B.C., Levine and Chiasson, JJ.A.

January 22, 2008.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of 14 counts of theft contrary to s. 332 of the Criminal Code (i.e., misappropriation of money held under direction) (see [2005] B.C.T.C. Uned. 63). He was sentenced to 12 to 18 months in prison plus restitution orders of $65,000. He appealed his conviction.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal, in a decision reported [2007] B.C.A.C. Uned. 103, dismissed the conviction appeal. The accused obtained leave to appeal the sentences.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 5720.4

Punishments (sentence) - Conditional sentence - When available or appropriate - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5854 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5854

Sentence - Theft - The accused was found guilty of promoting the sale of a company's shares to investors, on promises that the shares would be listed on a stock exchange, and deliberately delaying or failing to provide share certificates to the investors, with the result that the investors could not deal with their shares - He was convicted of 14 counts of theft and sentenced to 12 to 18 months in prison plus restitution orders of $65,000 - He appealed the sentences, arguing that the sentencing judge erred in failing to impose a conditional sentence and in failing to reduce the length of the sentences to take into account the restitution order - The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - The court held that the aggravating factors overwhelmed the mitigating factors in this case to such a degree that they mandated imprisonment for these serious offences - Further, the sentencing judge properly emphasized the need for denunciation and deterrence, and took into account the proper principles, including the reduction required as a result of the restitution orders, in determining the length of the sentences.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Siemens (K.G.) (1999), 138 Man.R.(2d) 90; 202 W.A.C. 90; 136 C.C.C.(3d) 353 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Yates (A.E.) (2002), 174 B.C.A.C. 119; 286 W.A.C. 119; 169 C.C.C.(3d) 506; 2002 BCCA 583, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Burkart (M.M.) (2006), 231 B.C.A.C. 129; 381 W.A.C. 129; 214 C.C.C.(3d) 226; 2006 BCCA 446, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Dickson (T.L.) (2007), 248 B.C.A.C. 217; 412 W.A.C. 217; 2007 BCCA 561, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Hoy (B.W.) (1998), 113 B.C.A.C. 155; 184 W.A.C. 155 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Skalbania (N.) (1998), 116 B.C.A.C. 117; 190 W.A.C. 117; 131 C.C.C.(3d) 166 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Schneider (H.) (2002), 166 B.C.A.C. 206; 271 W.A.C. 206; 2002 BCCA 143, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Khan (M.) (2002), 181 B.C.A.C. 3; 298 W.A.C. 3; 2002 BCCA 703, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Autenrieth (J.T.) (2003), 186 B.C.A.C. 223; 306 W.A.C. 223; 2003 BCCA 521, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Zeek (M.J.) (2004), 193 B.C.A.C. 104; 316 W.A.C. 104; 2004 BCCA 42, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Stephenson (J.G.) (2006), 222 B.C.A.C. 306; 368 W.A.C. 306; 2006 BCCA 104, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Ireland (J.J.) (2007), 244 B.C.A.C. 317; 403 W.A.C. 317; 2007 BCCA 387, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Proulx (J.K.D.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 61; 249 N.R. 201; 142 Man.R.(2d) 161; 212 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Mohebtash (M.), [2007] B.C.A.C. Uned. 123; 2007 BCCA 427, refd to. [para. 20].

Counsel:

M. Tammen, for the appellant;

S.D. Cooke, for the respondent, Crown.

This appeal was heard before Finch, C.J.B.C., Levine and Chiasson, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Levine, J.A., delivered the following decision orally, for the court, on January 22, 2008.