R. v. Jobb, (1988) 67 Sask.R. 315 (CA)

• Judge: Cameron, Wakeling and Sherstobitoff, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: August 10, 1988
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1988), 67 Sask.R. 315 (CA)

R. v. Jobb (1988), 67 Sask.R. 315 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Leo Gabriel Jobb (appellant)

(No. 3028)

Indexed As: R. v. Jobb

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Cameron, Wakeling and Sherstobitoff, JJ.A.

August 10, 1988.

Summary:

The accused pleaded guilty to assault with a weapon contrary to s. 245.1(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. The accused had a previous conviction for assault causing bodily harm, therefore the trial judge imposed the mandatory 10 year firearms prohibition order under s. 98(1)(b), notwithstanding the Crown did not give notice under s. 592(1) that it intended to seek the greater punishment by reason of previous conviction. The accused appealed, submitting that a s. 98(1)(b) order of prohibition for 10 years or more could not be made in the absence of notice under s. 592(1).

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and substituted a five year prohibition for noncompliance with s. 592(1).

Criminal Law - Topic 5606

Punishments - Increased punishment for prior convictions - Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, s. 492 - Section 98(1)(a) required that a person convicted of a serious offence involving violence be prohibited from possessing firearms, etc. for a period of at least five years - Section 98(1)(b) provided for a prohibition of at least 10 years for a subsequent offence - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal held that a 10 year prohibition could not be made unless the Crown complied with s. 592, which required giving notice to the accused of the Crown's intent to seek a greater punishment by reason of previous conviction.

Criminal Law - Topic 5799

Punishments - Prohibition orders - Respecting firearms - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5606 above].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Grossetete (1983), 43 A.R. 321, (N.W.T.T.Ct.), agreed with [para. 4].

R. v. Sheehan (1976), 16 N.B.R.(2d) 43; 21 A.P.R. 43 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Ronaghan (1984), 13 C.C.C.(3d) 480; 49 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 33; 145 A.P.R. 33 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Willis (1872), L.R. 363, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Summers (1871), L.R. C.C. 182 (U.K.), refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Edwards (1907), 13 C.C.C. 202 (Man. C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Neufeld (1960), 34 C.R. 236; 129 C.C.C. 327 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Plotz, [1984] 5 W.W.R. 263; 13 C.C.C.(3d) 107 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Pidbluny, 20 C.R.N.S. 310 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Lapierre (1982), 53 N.S.R.(2d) 653; 109 A.P.R. 653; 16 M.V.R. 81 (N.S.C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 83(1), sect. 98(1)(a), sect. 98(1)(b), sect. 245.1(1)(a), sect. 245.1(1)(b), sect. 592, sect. 669(a.1).

Authors and Works Noticed:

Crankshaw's Criminal Code of Canada (8th Ed.), pp. 17-466 to 17-470 [para. 9].

Popple, Prosecutions for Second Offences (1947), 3 C.R. 422 [para. 9].

Counsel:

M. Ryan, for the appellant;

D.J. Britton, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard before Cameron, Wakeling and Sherstobitoff, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

On August 10, 1988, Cameron, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.