R. v. Meechas (T.), (2012) 281 Man.R.(2d) 78 (PC)

• Judge: Smith, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: June 29, 2012
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (2012), 281 Man.R.(2d) 78 (PC);2012 MBPC 53

R. v. Meechas (T.) (2012), 281 Man.R.(2d) 78 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2012] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. JL.002

Her Majesty The Queen v. Tristan Meechas

(2012 MBPC 53)

Indexed As: R. v. Meechas (T.)

Manitoba Provincial Court

Smith, P.C.J.

June 29, 2012.

Summary:

The 18 year old aboriginal accused pleaded guilty to robbery. The accused was a first-time offender, with a positive pre-sentence report and assessed as a low risk to re-offend. The accused sought a two year suspended sentence plus probation. The Crown sought nine months' imprisonment, arguing that the robbery was a "serious personal injury offence" for which a conditional sentence was precluded.

The Manitoba Provincial Court sentenced the accused to an 18 month suspended sentence plus probation, including 100 hours of community service plus a nightly curfew for the first 12 months.

Criminal Law - Topic 5704

Punishments (sentence) - Suspended sentence - Circumstances when appropriate - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5855 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5846.1

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Aboriginal offenders - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5855 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5846.5

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Sentence precedents (incl. starting point principle and sentencing ranges) - The accused pleaded guilty to robbery - The Crown referenced the Alberta sentencing range for robbery offences to argue that imprisonment was presumptively required - The Manitoba Provincial Court rejected the submission, stating that "as to the proposed range set out by the Alberta appellate cases, the Crown was unable to provide Manitoba authorities referring to such a range. In any event, even where custodial ranges have been expressed by appellate authorities, the Supreme Court of Canada has reminded courts that ranges are not grids to be slavishly followed but only guidelines. An individualized approach to sentencing should be followed in every case" - See paragraph 63.

Criminal Law - Topic 5855

Sentence - Robbery - The 18 year old aboriginal accused chased down a younger teen, yelling that he wanted all of his money - The teen threw down his Ipod and escaped - The accused took the Ipod - He pleaded guilty to robbery - No violence was used or threatened - No weapons were involved and the offence was impulsive rather than pre-planned - The accused expressed immediate remorse and pleaded guilty - The teen was uninjured and got his Ipod back - The accused was a first-time offender, with a positive pre-sentence report and assessed as a low risk to re-offend - The risk related to the accused being a "follower" when associating with others - The accused sought a suspended sentence - The Crown sought nine months' imprisonment, arguing that robbery normally called for incarceration - The Manitoba Provincial Court held that this robbery was not a "serious personal injury offence" precluding a conditional sentence - No violence was used or threatened - After considering the Gladue factors respecting sentencing aboriginal offenders and the circumstances of the offence and the offender, the court determined that incarceration was not required - The accused had been released on bail for one year without incident - The offence was out of character - There appeared to be no substance abuse or behavioural issues and the accused was in Grade 11 and intended to graduate - The court rejected the Crown's submission that robbery presumptively required incarceration - This robbery was at the low end of the spectrum respecting seriousness - The court sentenced the accused to an 18 month suspended sentence plus probation - Conditions included 12 months of a nightly curfew and 100 hours of community service.

Words and Phrases

Serious personal injury offence - The Manitoba Provincial Court held that a robbery without the use of threat of violence or weapons was not a "serious personal injury offence" that precluded the imposition of a conditional sentence - See paragraph 55.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Kunzig (M.F.S.), [2011] Man.R.(2d) Uned. 97; 2011 MBPC 81, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Gladue (J.T.), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688; 238 N.R. 1; 121 B.C.A.C. 161; 198 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Ipeelee (M.) (2012), 428 N.R. 1; 288 O.A.C. 224; 318 B.C.A.C. 1; 541 W.A.C. 1; 2012 SCC 13, refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Kotelko (B.E.J.) (2011), 272 Man.R.(2d) 87; 2011 MBPC 76, refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Simpson (M.R.) (2012), 389 Sask.R. 157; 2012 SKPC 18, dist. [para. 51].

R. v. Carter, 1992 ABCA 190, refd to. [para. 58].

R. v. Nylund, 1991 ABCA 346, refd to. [para. 58].

R. v. Saeed (A.A.) (2004), 357 A.R. 238; 334 W.A.C. 238; 2004 ABCA 384, refd to. [para. 58].

R. v. Porter (K.A.) (1996), 71 B.C.A.C. 76; 117 W.A.C. 76; 1996 CanLII 2990 (C.A.), dist. [para. 58].

R. v. Connors (S.) (2010), 295 N.S.R.(2d) 271; 935 A.P.R. 271; 2006 NSPC 63, dist. [para. 58].

R. v. Nasogaluak (L.M.) (2010), 398 N.R. 107; 474 A.R. 88; 479 W.A.C. 88; 2010 SCC 6, refd to. [para. 63].

R. v. Carver (1980), 4 Man.R.(2d) 107 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 67].

R. v. Ramsay (1985), 36 Man.R.(2d) 184 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 67].

R. v. Bartlett, [1961] M.J. No. 2 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 67].

R. v. Leask (J.C.) (1996), 113 Man.R.(2d) 265; 131 W.A.C. 265 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 85].

R. v. McCormick, [1979] 4 W.W.R. 453; 7 Man.R.(2d) 30 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 92].

Counsel:

Peter Edgett, for the Crown;

James Wood, for the accused.

This matter was heard before Smith, P.C.J., of the Manitoba Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on June 29, 2012.