R. v. Laroche (D.), [2015] A.R. TBEd. NO.031

• Judge: Fraser, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: October 14, 2015
• Citations: [2015] A.R. TBEd. NO.031;2015 ABPC 215

R. v. Laroche (D.), [2015] A.R. TBEd. NO.031

MLB being edited

Currently being edited for A.R. - judgment temporarily in rough form.

Temp. Cite: [2015] A.R. TBEd. NO.031

Her Majesty the Queen v. David Laroche

(140787284P1; 2015 ABPC 215)

Indexed As: R. v. Laroche (D.)

Alberta Provincial Court

Fraser, P.C.J.

October 14, 2015.

Summary:

The 27 year old accused was found guilty of three robberies of convenience stores while masked, breach of probation by possessing a knife to commit two of the robberies, and breach of recognizance by committing offences while on a recognizance (see [2015] A.R. TBEd. JL.019). The accused also committed an assault causing bodily and a theft between the first and second robbery. In the first robbery he yielded a crowbar. In the second and third robberies, which occurred on the same night within 11 minutes of each other, he displayed a knife and, in one instance, jabbed at the clerk. In the first robbery, he had two accomplices who intimidated the clerk and a customer. All the robberies took place in the middle of the night when the stores and clerks were most vulnerable and the clerks were working alone. At trial, the accused attempted to manufacture an alibi. He had an extensive criminal record.

The Alberta Provincial Court concluded that the appropriate sentence for each robbery was 4.5 years and one year consecutive for being masked, for a total of 5.5 years. The second and third robberies were a spree and therefore the sentences for those offences were to be concurrent to each other, but consecutive to the sentence for the first robbery. Applying the totality principle, the court reduced each sentence by year. The court further reduced the sentence by 15 months for 10 months of pre-sentence custody. This resulted in a sentence of seven years and nine months for the robberies. The court further sentenced the accused to three months of consecutive imprisonment for the breach of probation, reduced by one month for the totality principle, and three months' imprisonment for the breach of recognizance, to be served concurrent with the robbery sentences. All of the convictions were indictable and carried a $200, or two day in lieu of, victim fine surcharge. As it was unlikely that the accused would be able to pay, the court gave him credit for time spent in pre-sentence custody from the time of sentencing submissions to the date of sentencing at 1:5 to one which was slightly more than the 16 days in lieu. In the result the sentence for victim fine surcharge was one day concurrent. This resulted in a total sentence of seven years and 11 months' imprisonment. The court also imposed a mandatory firearms prohibition order.

Criminal Law - Topic 5627

Punishments (sentence) - Fines, penalties and compensation orders - Victim fine surcharge - See paragraph 29.

Criminal Law - Topic 5802

Sentencing - General - Concurrent sentences - See paragraphs 22 and 25.

Criminal Law - Topic 5803

Sentencing - General - Consecutive sentences - See paragraphs 26 and 27.

Criminal Law - Topic 5804

Sentencing - General - Consecutive sentences - Reduced total term (totality principle) - See paragraphs 26 and 27.

Criminal Law - Topic 5834.7

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Mental illness or disorder - See paragraph 20.

Criminal Law - Topic 5841

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Age of accused - See paragraph 19.

Criminal Law - Topic 5846.5

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Sentence precedents - Starting point principle - See paragraphs 24 and 25.

Criminal Law - Topic 5855

Sentence - Robbery - See paragraphs 21 to 31.

Criminal Law - Topic 5892

Sentence - Breach of restraining order, recognizance or undertaking - See paragraphs 21 to 31.

Criminal Law - Topic 5898

Sentence - Breach of probation - See paragraphs 21 to 31.

This matter was heard by Fraser, P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment at Calgary, Alberta, on October 14, 2015.