R. v. C.M., (2013) 549 A.R. 330 (PC)

• Judge: Franklin, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: February 01, 2013
• Citations: (2013), 549 A.R. 330 (PC);2013 ABPC 30

R. v. C.M. (2013), 549 A.R. 330 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] A.R. TBEd. MR.025

Her Majesty the Queen v. C.M. (101447688Y101001; 2013 ABPC 30)

Indexed As: R. v. C.M.

Alberta Provincial Court

Franklin, P.C.J.

February 11, 2013.

Summary:

The accused youth was charged with second degree murder in the shooting death of a robbery victim. The accused's defence was that he had no knowledge of the robbery plan and did not participate in the shooting as he was not at the murder scene (alibi).

The Alberta Provincial Court, in a judgment reported (2012), 540 A.R. 99, found the accused not guilty of second degree murder, but guilty as a party to the offence of manslaughter. The Crown applied under s. 64 of the Youth Criminal Justice Act to have the accused, who was almost 18 years of age at the time of the offence, sentenced as an adult.

The Alberta Provincial Court allowed the application. The maximum youth sentence of three years custody and supervision would not be of sufficient length, even if no credit was given for the two years and three months spent in pre-trial custody, to hold the accused accountable for his offending behaviour.

Editor's Note: Certain names in the following case have been initialized or the case otherwise edited to prevent the disclosure of identities where required by law, publication ban, Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.

Criminal Law - Topic 8802

Young offender - Decisions (incl. punishments) - Credit for time served - [See Criminal Law - Topic 8817.8 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 8817.8

Young offenders - Decisions (incl. punishments) - Adult sentence - The accused youth and others planned to rob the victim of drugs and money - The accused entered the victim's vehicle knowing that one of the others (shooter) had a loaded handgun - They expected resistance and agreed to "harm" the victim if he resisted, although no agreement was made to shoot him - When the victim tried to flee the vehicle, the accused grabbed and restrained him while the shooter shot him in the head - The accused was charged with second degree murder, but was convicted of manslaughter - The Alberta Provincial Court allowed the Crown' application under the Youth Criminal Justice Act to have the accused, 11 days shy of 18 years of age at the time of the offence, sentenced as an adult -Manslaughter was a serious offence - The accused's moral blameworthiness was high - There was no remorse or acceptance of responsibility - The accused spent two years and three months in pre-trial custody, all of which was spent in the most secure unit because of his disruptive and noncompliant behaviour - The accused refused to participate in any available programming, feeling no need to change anything - He now wished to be released to return to his life of drugs, crime and anti-social leisure activities - The accused was defiant, uncooperative, aggressive, manipulative and obstinate - He saw himself as better than others - Rehabilitative prospects were not good - He was diagnosed with an anti-social personality disorder and assessed as a high risk for violence in the short and long-term - The accused amassed a lengthy criminal record commensurate with his life of crime - The court held that the maximum youth sentence (three years' custody and supervision) would not be of sufficient length, even if no credit was given for the two years and three months spent in pre-trial custody, to hold the accused accountable for his offending behaviour and allow for his reintegration into society.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. A.O. et al. (2007), 222 O.A.C. 38; 2007 ONCA 144, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. G.A.T. (2007), 214 Man.R.(2d) 272; 395 W.A.C. 272; 2007 MBCA 88, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. B.I.H. (2007), 214 Man.R.(2d) 241; 395 W.A.C. 241; 2007 MBCA 89, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. K.D.T., [2006] A.R. Uned. 54; 2006 ABCA 151, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. D.M.T. (2012), 522 A.R. 180; 544 W.A.C. 180 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. D.D.T. (2010), 493 A.R. 167; 502 W.A.C. 167 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. D.B. (2008), 374 N.R. 221; 237 O.A.C. 110; 2008 SCC 25, refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. C.H.C. (2009), 465 A.R. 240; 2009 ABQB 125, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. A.A., [2011] A.R. Uned. 664; 2011 ABQB 598, refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. K.B.P., [2012] A.R. Uned. 180; 2012 ABQB 135, refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. M.M. (2012), 541 A.R. 348; 2012 ABPC 153, refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Laberge (K.K.) (1995), 165 A.R. 375; 89 W.A.C. 375 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Martineau, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 633; 112 N.R. 83; 109 A.R. 321, refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. Estacio (D.I.) (2010), 474 A.R. 360; 479 W.A.C. 360; 2010 ABCA 69, refd to. [para. 103].

R. v. J.M., 2010 ONCJ 100, refd to. [para. 103].

R. v. Williams (M.B.W.) (2008), 437 A.R. 325; 433 W.A.C. 325; 2008 ABCA 317, refd to. [para. 108].

Counsel:

M. Hayes-Richards, J. Stewart and R. Persad, for the Crown;

J. Conway, for the accused.

This application was heard on January 28 to February 1, 2013, at Edmonton, Alberta, before Franklin, P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on February 11, 2013.