R. v. Lee (S.D.), 2011 NSPC 81

• Judge: Derrick, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: November 07, 2011
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: 2011 NSPC 81;(2011), 309 N.S.R.(2d) 163 (PC)

R. v. Lee (S.D.) (2011), 309 N.S.R.(2d) 163 (PC);

    979 A.P.R. 163

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2011] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. NO.040

Her Majesty the Queen v. Sherri Dawn Lee

(2119017; 2119019; 2011 NSPC 81)

Indexed As: R. v. Lee (S.D.)

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Derrick, P.C.J.

November 10, 2011.

Summary:

The accused was charged with theft of $66,939.58 and two counts of fraud in relation to her former employment.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court, in a decision reported at [2011] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 106, convicted the accused. The accused requested a conditional sentence.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court sentenced the accused to 10 months' imprisonment, one year of probation and ordered restitution of $68,782.22.

Editor's Note: for another case involving this accused see 298 N.S.R.(2d) 194; 945 A.P.R. 194 (Prov. Ct.).

Criminal Law - Topic 5720.4

Punishments (sentence) - Conditional sentence - When available or appropriate - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court stated that "... I find it hard to imagine a conditional sentence being granted where an offender admits to having lied at trial about a matter that re-emerges for consideration at sentencing. Conditional sentencing involves an element of expectation and trust that the offender will comply with conditions and act in good faith under those conditions in the community. Instrumental lying to the court would shatter any confidence a Court might have in an offender's commitment to the terms of a community-based sentence." - See paragraph 88.

Criminal Law - Topic 5720.4

Punishments (sentence) - Conditional sentence - When available or appropriate - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5854 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5792

Punishments (sentence) - Restitution - When appropriate - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5854 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5831.1

Sentencing - Considerations - Offences involving breach of trust - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5854 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5854

Sentence - Theft - The 37 year old accused was charged with theft of $66,939.58 over a period of months and two counts of fraud arising from her former employment as an assistant manager at a small vulnerable business (spa) - She believed she was not adequately compensated for her hard work - She handled the bank deposits almost exclusively - She covered up the theft - The owners and manager were broad-sided by the accused's dishonesty and violation of trust - The owners feared ruination and the loss jeopardized their retirement - The accused had a difficult adolescence - She became a single mom when she was 20 - She had overcome substance abuse issues and had previously worked hard - She attended church regularly - She was married and had two young step daughters - She had 14 "glowing" letters of support from family and friends - No criminal record - She had some health problems that might be affected by imprisonment - She had lied to numerous people and the court about having battled and beaten cancer in order to obtain sympathy and leniency - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court sentenced the accused to 10 months' imprisonment - A conditional sentence was not appropriate - The accused was not remorseful and had taken no steps to repay any money - The accused's apparent good character allowed her to drain her employer's revenues - The cancer deceit overshadowed the testimonials to her good character and revealed her continued willingness to use dishonesty as a means to an end - The court also imposed one year of probation and ordered restitution of $68,782.22.

Criminal Law - Topic 5859

Sentence - Fraud - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5854 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Naugle (T.L.) (2011), 302 N.S.R.(2d) 68; 955 A.P.R. 68 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. J.L.M.A. (2010), 499 A.R. 1; 514 W.A.C. 1; 2010 ABCA 363, refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Vallee (R.L.), 2004 CarswellAlta 1024 (Prov. Ct.), affd. (2004), 357 A.R. 9; 334 W.A.C. 9 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

R. v. MacEachern, [1978] O.J. No. 987 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Tucker (1988), 83 N.S.R.(2d) 6; 210 A.P.R. 6 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Hill (L.A.), [1997] N.S.J. No. 97 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Toews (L.A.), [2007] A.R. Uned. 587 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. McKinnon (V.A.) (2005), 361 A.R. 271; 339 W.A.C. 271 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Reid (W.) (2004), 194 B.C.A.C. 18; 317 W.A.C. 18 (Yuk. C.A.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Steeves (C.E.) et al. (2005), 288 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 751 A.P.R. 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Cremer (M.T.), [2007] A.R. Uned. 431 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Miller (L.M.), [2010] A.R. Uned. 118 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Geary (H.J.) (2006), 213 Man.R.(2d) 12 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Williams (B.), [2007] O.T.C. Uned. S34 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Stewart, [2002] B.C.J. No. 2456 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Proulx (J.K.D.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 61; 249 N.R. 201; 142 Man.R.(2d) 161; 212 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 38].

R. v. Bowden (D.), [2011] Northwest Terr. Cases Uned. 10 (Terr. Ct.), refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. Upton (D.A.) (2008), 271 N.S.R.(2d) 210; 867 A.P.R. 210 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 43].

R. v. Alakija (N.R.), [2007] A.R. Uned. 545 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 45].

R. v. Robinson, [2003] O.J. No. 4722 (C.J.), refd to. [para. 45].

R. v. Shaw (M.F.E.), [2004] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) No. 58 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 46].

R. v. Gauthier (L.F.) (1998), 168 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 278; 517 A.P.R. 278 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 46].

R. v. MacAdam (D.J.) (2003), 222 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; 663 A.P.R. 1 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 47].

R. v. Decoff, [2000] N.S.J. No. 224 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 48].

R. v. Smith (W.H.) et al. (1999), 170 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 197; 522 A.P.R. 197 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 48].

R. v. Séguin (G.) (1997), 54 O.T.C. 62 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 50].

R. v. Mastromonaco, [2002] O.J. No. 4612 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Matheson (J.R.) (2001), 194 N.S.R.(2d) 124; 606 A.P.R. 124 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 53].

R. v. Saunders (E.R.) (2000), 189 N.S.R.(2d) 126; 590 A.P.R. 126 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 53].

R. v. Christie (W.H.M.) (2002), 208 N.S.R.(2d) 223; 652 A.P.R. 223 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 53].

R. v. Naugler (A.P.) (2011), 308 N.S.R.(2d) 201; 976 A.P.R. 201 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 55].

R. v. J.W. (1997), 99 O.A.C. 161 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 61].

R. v. Gray (L.V.) et al. (1995), 76 O.A.C. 387 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 63].

R. v. Fleet (M.) (1997), 104 O.A.C. 394 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 68].

R. v. Lamoureux (F.G.) (2011), 306 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 332; 951 A.P.R. 332 (P.E.I.S.C.), refd to. [para. 69].

R. v. T.R.J., [2004] O.A.C. Uned. 180 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 83].

R. v. Nguyen (T.M.), [2006] O.A.C. Uned. 92 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 83].

R. v. Catala (O.), [2006] O.A.C. Uned. 555 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 83].

R. v. Stoutley, 2002 CarswellOnt 7759 (C.J.), refd to. [para. 85].

R. v. Yates (A.) (2002), 174 B.C.A.C. 119; 286 W.A.C. 119 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 90].

R. v. Castro (C.) (2010), 270 O.A.C. 140 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 91].

R. v. Zelensky, Eaton (T.) Co. and Canada (Attorney General), [1978] 2 S.C.R. 940; 21 N.R. 372, refd to. [para. 91].

Counsel:

Mark Heerema, Crown Attorney;

Peter Katsihtis, for the defence.

This sentencing was heard on July 7, September 9 and November 7, 2011, by Derrick, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on November 10, 2011.