R. v. Jacobs (M.), (2015) 360 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 333 (NLPC)

• Judge: Gorman, P.C.J.
• Court: Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court (Canada)
• Case Date: January 07, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (2015), 360 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 333 (NLPC);2015 NLPC 1314

R. v. Jacobs (M.) (2015), 360 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 333 (NLPC);

    1118 A.P.R. 333

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] Nfld. & P.E.I.R. TBEd. JA.002

Her Majesty the Queen v. Matthew Jacobs

(2015 NLPC 1314A00843)

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

Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court

Gorman, P.C.J.

January 9, 2015.

Summary:

The accused pleaded guilty to two counts of break and entry into commercial premises, two counts of breach of probation, two counts of possession of a controlled substance (cocaine and ecstasy) for the purpose of trafficking, and one count each of theft, operating a motor vehicle with an excessive blood-alcohol level, and operating a motor vehicle while prohibited. The Crown proceeded by way of summary conviction for all of the offences.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court sentenced the accused to a total of 31 months' imprisonment, less 57 days for 38 days of pretrial custody. The court also imposed a DNA order, a weapons/ammunition prohibition order (10 years/life), restitution orders, and mandatory victim surcharges for two of the offences. The court also ordered forfeiture of the items seized by the police in relation to the drug offences.

Criminal Law - Topic 5791

Punishments (sentence) - Restitution - General - The Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court stated that "One of the principles enshrined by Parliament in our Criminal Code speaks to the importance of offenders making 'reparations for harm done to victims.' As a result, compensating victims for their loss should be a judicial priority in sentencing. It also has the side benefit of promoting 'a sense of responsibility in offenders' and encouraging an acknowledgment by them 'of the harm done' to victims by their crimes (see s. 718(f) of the Criminal Code). Finally, it prevents offenders from profiting by their crimes ... " - See paragraph 101.

Criminal Law - Topic 5792

Punishments (sentence) - Restitution - When appropriate - The Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court, in deciding whether to allow the Crown's request to order an accused to pay restitution, stated that "... ordering restitution is a direct means by which a court can ensure that those directly affected by a crime receive some financial redress. Therefore, a valid reason must exist for declining to order restitution. Restitution is too important an objective of sentencing to be rejected summarily. The rejection of a request for restitution should not be a mechanical exercise based upon the offender's present circumstances." - See paragraph 104.

Criminal Law - Topic 5792

Punishments (sentence) - Restitution - When appropriate - The 25 year old accused pleaded guilty to two counts of break and entry into commercial premises (stole power tools, an all-terrain vehicle (recovered) and a snowmobile (recovered)), two counts of breach of probation, two counts of possession of a controlled substance (cocaine and ecstasy) for the purpose of trafficking, and one count each of theft (stole $900), operating a motor vehicle with an excessive blood-alcohol level, and operating a motor vehicle while prohibited - The Crown proceeded by way of summary conviction for all of the offences - The accused had three prior convictions (driving with excessive blood-alcohol, dangerous driving and driving while disqualified) - He had been bound by a probation order when he committed the current offences - The break and entries were planned and deliberate involving several individuals with steps taken to hide and dispose of the stolen property - He sold drugs and stole to support his drug addictions - He accepted responsibility, apologized and expressed gratitude for the opportunity that incarceration would provide for dealing with his alcohol and drug addictions - The pre-sentence report suggested that rehabilitation might be realistic - He requested the maximum period of the range of imprisonment (31 months) recommended by the Crown - The Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court determined the appropriate consecutive sentences for the individual offences which totalled 43 months - Applying the totality principle, the court reduced the sentence to 31 months' imprisonment - The court further reduced the sentence by 57 days for 38 days of pretrial custody - The court also imposed a DNA order, a weapons/ammunition prohibition order (10 years/life), restitution orders for $900 and $403.49, and mandatory victim surcharges for two of the offences - Although the accused lacked the current means to pay restitution, his prospects for employment were realistic - Restitution would hopefully promote his rehabilitation by allowing him to make financial amends to his victims - See paragraphs 76 to 107.

Criminal Law - Topic 5793

Punishments (sentence) - Restitution - Considerations (incl. conditions precedent) - [See first Criminal Law - Topic 5792 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5793

Punishments (sentence) - Restitution - Considerations (incl. conditions precedent) - The Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court, in deciding whether to include a restitution order in an accused's sentence, stated that "It is important to understand that the imposition of a s. 738 Criminal Code order does not require an immediate means to pay ... , though the offender's means must be considered ... " - See paragraph 103.

Criminal Law - Topic 5804

Sentencing - General - Consecutive sentences - Reduced total terms (totality principle) - [See second Criminal Law - Topic 5792 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5850

Sentence - Trafficking in a narcotic or a controlled drug or substance - Possession for the purpose of trafficking - [See second Criminal Law - Topic 5792 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5851

Sentence - Break and enter - [See second Criminal Law - Topic 5792 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5854

Sentence - Theft - [See second Criminal Law - Topic 5792 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5885

Sentence - Driving while disqualified or suspended - [See second Criminal Law - Topic 5792 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5886

Sentence - Impaired driving - [See second Criminal Law - Topic 5792 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5898

Sentence - Breach of probation - [See second Criminal Law - Topic 5792 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Lundrigan (D.A.) (2012), 324 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 270; 1007 A.P.R. 270; 2012 NLCA 43, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Knott (D.W.) (2012), 433 N.R. 38; 324 B.C.A.C. 1; 551 W.A.C. 1; 2012 SCC 42, refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Cluney (N.) (2013), 338 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 57; 1049 A.P.R. 57; 2013 NLCA 46, refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Briand (R.) et al. (2010), 302 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 67; 938 A.P.R. 67; 2010 NLCA 67, refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Johnston (H.E.) (2011), 311 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 129; 967 A.P.R. 129; 2011 NLCA 56, refd to. [para. 42].

R. v. Mayo, [2011] N.J. No. 246 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 44].

R. v. Saunders (S.) (2011), 314 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 205; 977 A.P.R. 205 (N.L. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 45].

R. v. Pitcher (R.J.) (2012), 326 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 37; 1012 A.P.R. 37 (N.L. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 47].

R. v. Thorne (S.R.) (2014), 356 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 201; 1108 A.P.R. 201; 2014 NLTD(G) 111, refd to. [para. 48].

R. v. Sutherland (B.J.) (2014), 352 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 276; 1097 A.P.R. 276 (N.L. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 50].

R. v. Sullivan (R.J.) (1997), 158 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 91; 490 A.P.R. 91 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Hope (R.) (1999), 173 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 121; 530 A.P.R. 121 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 52].

R. v. Ferrie (C.M.) (2014), 355 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 120; 1106 A.P.R. 120; 2014 NLTD(G) 112, refd to. [para. 53].

R. v. Murphy (D.) (2011), 304 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 266; 944 A.P.R. 266; 2011 NLCA 16, refd to. [para. 54].

R. v. Hutchings (R.) (2012), 316 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 211; 982 A.P.R. 211; 2012 NLCA 2, refd to. [para. 55].

R. v. Adams (K.) (2014), 349 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 140; 1085 A.P.R. 140 (N.L. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 56].

R. v. Young (G.T.), [2014] Nfld. & P.E.I.R. Uned. 22 (N.L. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 57].

R. v. Roul (S.P.C.) (2014), 346 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 167; 1078 A.P.R. 167 (N.L. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 58].

R. v. Myers (R.B.) (2014), 347 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 245; 1080 A.P.R. 245 (N.L. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 59].

R. v. Best (C.A.T.) (2014), 355 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 82; 1106 A.P.R. 82; 2014 NLTD(G) 108, refd to. [para. 60].

R. v. Young (G.T.) (2014), 357 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 40; 1109 A.P.R. 40; 2014 NLTD(G) 113, refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. Strickland (A.P.) (2010), 294 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 190; 808 A.P.R. 190; 2010 NLTD 2, refd to. [para. 63].

R. v. Simmonds (R.M.) (2011), 313 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 284; 974 A.P.R. 284; 2011 NLTD(G) 135, refd to. [para. 64].

R. v. Stewart (W.J.) (2012), 332 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; 1030 A.P.R. 1; 2012 NLTD(G) 187, refd to. [para. 65].

R. v. Blok-Andersen (P.) (2014), 358 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 211; 1113 A.P.R. 211; 2014 NLTD(G) 141, refd to. [para. 67].

R. v. Beaudry (A.), [2007] 1 S.C.R. 190; 356 N.R. 323; 2007 SCC 5, refd to. [para. 68].

R. v. Bernshaw (N.), [1995] 1 S.C.R. 254; 176 N.R. 81; 53 B.C.A.C. 1; 87 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 68].

R. v. Pasznyk (J.P.), [2014] VSCA 87, refd to. [para. 68].

R. v. Griffin (J.) (2013), 337 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 137; 1047 A.P.R. 137 (N.L. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 69].

R. v. Slaney (B.J.), [2009] N.J. No. 327 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 70].

R. v. Edwards (E.M.), [2015] Nfld. & P.E.I.R. TBEd. JA.004 (N.L. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 71].

R. v. Bighead (S.D.) (2013), 417 Sask.R. 47; 580 W.A.C. 47; 2013 SKCA 63, refd to. [para. 72].

R. v. Slaney (R.H.) (2013), 344 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 144; 1068 A.P.R. 144; 2013 NLCA 70, refd to. [para. 73].

R. v. Wheeler (R.) (2014), 350 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 352; 1088 A.P.R. 352 (N.L. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 75].

R. v. Frost (J.V.W.) (2012), 396 N.B.R.(2d) 305; 1024 A.P.R. 305; 2012 NBCA 94, refd to. [para. 78].

R. v. Rowe (D.) (2008), 273 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 38; 833 A.P.R. 38; 2008 NLCA 3, refd to. [para. 81].

R. v. E.W. (2002), 216 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 89; 647 A.P.R. 89 (N.L.C.A.), refd to. [para. 81].

R. v. Crocker (B.J.) (1991), 93 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 222; 292 A.P.R. 222 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 84].

R. v. Lewis (D.E.) (2012), 318 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 64; 989 A.P.R. 64; 2012 NLCA 11, refd to. [para. 85].

R. v. Khawaja (M.M.) (2012), 437 N.R. 42; 301 O.A.C. 200; 2012 SCC 69, refd to. [para. 87].

R. v. Summers (S.) (2014), 456 N.R. 1; 316 O.A.C. 349; 2014 SCC 26, refd to. [para. 93].

R. v. Wust (L.W.) et al., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 455; 252 N.R. 332; 134 B.C.A.C. 236; 219 W.A.C. 236, refd to. [para. 93].

R. v. Tanasescu (A.D.) (2011), 301 B.C.A.C. 163; 510 W.A.C. 163 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 101].

R. v. Minot (P.) (2011), 304 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 212; 944 A.P.R. 212; 2011 NLCA 7, refd to. [para. 101].

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. 103].

R. v. Zelensky, Eaton (T.) Co. and Canada (Attorney General) et al., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 940; 21 N.R. 372, refd to. [para. 103].

R. v. Spellacy (R.A.) (1995), 131 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 127; 408 A.P.R. 127; 27 W.C.B.(2d) 591 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 103].

R. v. Blacker (L.) (2006), 259 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 248; 781 A.P.R. 248; 2006 NLCA 48, refd to. [para. 103].

R. v. Strowbridge (D.J.) (2014), 346 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 203; 1078 A.P.R. 203; 2014 NLCA 4, refd to. [para. 103].

R. v. Castro (C.) (2010), 270 O.A.C. 140; 2010 ONCA 718, refd to. [para. 104].

Counsel:

L. St. Croix, for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador;

A. Joyce, for Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada;

S. Jones, for Mr. Jacobs.

This matter was heard at Corner Brook, N.L., on January 7, 2015, by Gorman, P.C.J., of the Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on January 9, 2015.