R. v. Idris (J.), (2007) 439 A.R. 374 (PC)

• Judge: Brown, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: June 26, 2007
• Citations: (2007), 439 A.R. 374 (PC);2007 ABPC 211

R. v. Idris (J.) (2007), 439 A.R. 374 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2007] A.R. TBEd. AU.037

Her Majesty the Queen v. James Idris (050267061P1; 2007 ABPC 211)

Indexed As: R. v. Idris (J.)

Alberta Provincial Court

Brown, P.C.J.

August 3, 2007.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of trafficking six Ecstasy pills.

The Alberta Provincial Court discharged the accused conditionally and placed him on probation for 30 months. The probation order included a condition requiring the accused to make a $5,000 charitable donation to the Adolescent Recovery Centre.

Criminal Law - Topic 4431

Procedure - Verdicts, discharges and dismissals - Conditional discharge in lieu of conviction - The accused was convicted of trafficking six Ecstasy pills - The accused sought a conditional discharge - The Alberta Provincial Court stated that while trafficking was a disturbingly prevalent offence, prevalence was not an outright bar to a discharge, especially given that some prevalent offences qualified for diversion programs - See paragraph 16.

Criminal Law - Topic 4431

Procedure - Verdicts, discharges and dismissals - Conditional discharge in lieu of conviction - The accused was convicted of trafficking six Ecstasy pills - The accused was supported by his wife, parents and siblings - He had four children - At the time of the offence, his relationship with his wife was under considerable strain, largely due to his mismanagement of a self-run business and the resultant financial pressures - Had some post-secondary education - Remorseful - Had matured greatly since the offence - The Alberta Provincial Court granted the accused a conditional discharge - This was an exceptional case where: (1) it was summary conviction offence, involving a small amount; (2) the accused was aged 31, with no criminal record; (3) the offence was out-of-character; (4) it was a one-time offence; and (5) a criminal record would have a negative impact on the accused's work as a computer technician, work that was greatly valued by his employer and clients - A conditional discharge was not contrary to the public interest - The court placed the accused on probation for 30 months - The conditions of the probation included the making of a $5,000 charitable donation - The length of the probation order and the amount of the donation was a reflection of the seriousness of the offence.

Criminal - Topic 5830.8

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Drug and narcotic offences - [See both Criminal Law - Topic 4431 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5836

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Deterrence - Prevalence of similar crime - [See first Criminal Law - Topic 4431 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5850

Sentence - Trafficking in a narcotic or a controlled drug or substance - [See second Criminal Law - Topic 4431 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Patrick (R.S.) (2006), 402 A.R. 231 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. J.C.F., [2005] O.A.C. Uned. 349 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Roberts (J.R.), [2005] A.R. Uned. 344 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Moore (C.A.), [2005] Yukon Cases (TerrCt) 10, refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Bercier (T.J.) (2004), 184 Man.R.(2d) 106; 318 W.A.C. 106 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Hogan, [2003] B.C.J. No. 3196 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Drew, [2003] O.J. No. 4396 (C.J.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Bouaban (B.I.) (2002), 309 A.R. 325 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Schell (J.R.) (2002), 313 A.R. 125 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Dhalla (A.) (2001), 304 A.R. 384 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Carbert (C.) (2001), 290 A.R. 172 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Ferguson, [2000] O.J. No. 5648 (C.J.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Schulhauser (B.J.) (1999), 258 A.R. 397 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Balaski, [1995] O.J. No. 3937 (C.J.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Burchnall and Dumont (1980), 24 A.R. 17 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. MacFarlane (1976), 55 A.R. 222 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

Counsel:

B.J. Holtby, Q.C., for the Crown;

R.B. Snukal, for the accused.

This action was heard on February 6 and June 26, 2007, by Brown, P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision at Calgary, Alberta, on August 3, 2007.