R. v. Slippery (J.T.), (2015) 472 Sask.R. 181 (CA)

JudgeRichards, C.J.S., Jackson and Whitmore, JJ.A.
CourtCourt of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
Case DateAugust 06, 2015
JurisdictionSaskatchewan
Citations(2015), 472 Sask.R. 181 (CA);2015 SKCA 149

R. v. Slippery (J.T.) (2015), 472 Sask.R. 181 (CA);

    658 W.A.C. 181

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] Sask.R. TBEd. DE.080

Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. James Terrance Slippery (respondent)

(CACR2550; CACR2533; 2015 SKCA 149)

Indexed As: R. v. Slippery (J.T.)

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Richards, C.J.S., Jackson and Whitmore, JJ.A.

December 24, 2015.

Summary:

The accused attacked his former girlfriend on two occasions. He was charged with robbery (Criminal Code, s. 344(1)) and breach of undertaking (s. 145(3)).

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court, in a decision reported at (2014), 459 Sask.R. 88, found the accused not guilty of robbery, but guilty of the lesser and included offence of assault in relation to the first incident. The accused was also found guilty of two breaches of undertaking. Following these convictions, the accused pleaded guilty to robbery in relation to the second incident and a third breach of undertaking. The accused was sentenced to 23 months' imprisonment and 12 months' probation with terms that he not contact the victim and that he complete programming for addictions domestic violence and anger management. The Crown appealed the conviction respecting the first incident, arguing that the accused should have been convicted of robbery rather than assault. The Crown also appealed the sentence, arguing that a fit sentence was five years' imprisonment.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal allowed the conviction appeal and dismissed the sentence appeal.

Editor's Note: Certain names in the following case have been initialized or the case otherwise edited to prevent the disclosure of identities where required by law, publication ban, Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.

Criminal Law - Topic 5831.9

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Domestic violence - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal disagreed with the proposition that "in imposing a sentence for domestic violence a trial judge must, as a matter of legal principle, always and necessarily emphasize denunciation and general deterrence above all else. Any rigid and unwavering view of this sort would be inconsistent with the fundamental notion that sentencing is to be done on a case-by-case basis in a way so as to reflect both the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender." - See paragraph 30.

Criminal Law - Topic 5831.9

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Domestic violence - [See first Criminal Law - Topic 5846.1 and Criminal Law - Topic 5855 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5832

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

Criminal Law - Topic 5846.1

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Aboriginal offenders - Slippery was an Aboriginal whose upbringing was characterized by abuse, abandonment and addictions - He was sentenced to 23 months' imprisonment and 12 months' probation for offences arising from two attacks on his former girlfriend - The Crown appealed the sentence, arguing that there was an insufficient connection between Slippery's background and the offences, and that the sentencing judge erred in concluding that Slippery's background moderated his moral blameworthiness - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - There was no onus on an offender to establish a causal link between background factors and an offence in order for those factors to become relevant in the sentencing process - Although systemic and background factors might be relevant to the question of an offender's responsibility, they were not determinative of it - A sentencing judge had to consider and weigh all factors that might bear on an offender's level of responsibility - It was open to the sentencing judge to find that Slippery's extremely difficult background shed at least some light on his moral blameworthiness - Other considerations included the fact that the attacks (1) were committed while Slippery was bound by a no-contact order respecting the victim; (2) were committed several weeks apart and were part of a continuing story of abuse; and (3) involved a degree of humiliation and degradation - See paragraphs 37 to 49.

Criminal Law - Topic 5846.1

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

Criminal Law - Topic 5846.7

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Offence committed while accused on recognizance or bail - [See first Criminal Law - Topic 5846.1 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5847.1

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Restorative justice - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5855 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5855

Sentence - Robbery - Slippery was an Aboriginal whose upbringing was characterized by abuse, abandonment and addictions - He was bound by an undertaking prohibiting him from having contact with his former girlfriend (W) - On June 22, Slippery located W on an apartment balcony - He wrapped a belt around W's neck and dragged her by her hair into the apartment - After repeatedly kicking W and kneeing her in the head, he took W's phone, called her a "dumb bitch" and left the apartment - On July 2, Slippery found W standing outside of the women's shelter - They went for a walk - Slippery became upset - He pulled W's dress over her head, then dragged her by the hair into an apartment building - He threw W's phone and purse into an apartment, entered the apartment and locked W outside - Slippery was sentenced to the following consecutive sentences: (a) six months' imprisonment for assault on June 22; (b) two months each for two breaches of undertaking on June 22 (concurrent to each other); (c) 12 months' imprisonment followed by 12 months' probation for robbery on July 2; and (d) three months for breach of undertaking on July 2 - The parties agreed that Slippery should have been convicted of robbery instead of assault for the June 22 incident - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the Crown's sentence appeal - The sentencing judge sent Slippery to jail to meet the goals of denunciation and deterrence, and she imposed a probationary term in order to separate Slippery from W after his release and to get him assistance for addictions, domestic violence and anger management - This was the sort of restorative approach to sentencing directed by the Supreme Court of Canada in Gladue (1999) and Ipeelee (2012) - The sentence also took into account Slippery's rehabilitative needs and the fact that the gravamen of the attacks was in the nature of assault rather than the taking of property - This made the offences unlike those addressed in the robbery precedents referred to by the Crown - The sentence was not demonstrably unfit - See paragraphs 50 to 57.

Criminal Law - Topic 5892

Sentence - Breach of restraining order, recognizance or undertaking - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5855 ].

Cases Noticed:

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. 20].

R. v. Ipeelee (M.), [2012] 1 S.C.R. 433; 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. 20].

R. v. Lacasse (T.) (2015), 478 N.R. 319; 2015 SCC 64, refd to. [para. 24].

R. v. Ochuschayoo (D.H.) (2004), 241 Sask.R. 284; 313 W.A.C. 284; 2004 SKCA 16, refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Chanalquay (J.F.) (2015), 472 Sask.R. 110; 658 W.A.C. 110; 2015 SKCA 141, refd to. [para. 47].

R. v. Ewenin, 2009 SKCA (SentDig) 21, dist. [para. 51].

R. v. Halkett, 2002 SKCA (SentDig) 50, dist. [para. 51].

R. v. Ahenakew (G.L.) (2001), 213 Sask.R. 292; 260 W.A.C. 292; 2001 SKCA 117, dist. [para. 51].

R. v. Smallboy, 1996 SKCA (SentDig) 60, dist. [para. 51].

R. v. Keenatch, 1996 SKCA (SentDig) 61, dist. [para. 51].

R. v. McLeod, 1995 SKCA (SentDig) 71, dist. [para. 51].

R. v. Neapetung, 1994 SKCA (SentDig) 88, dist. [para. 51].

R. v. Louison (W.C.) (2008), 310 Sask.R. 217; 423 W.A.C. 217; 2008 SKCA 69, refd to. [para. 55].

Counsel:

Erin Bartsch, for the appellant;

Michael Nolin, for the respondent.

These appeals were heard on August 6, 2015, before Richards, C.J.S., Jackson and Whitmore, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. Richards, C.J.S., delivered the following judgment for the court on December 24, 2015.

To continue reading

Request your trial
50 practice notes
  • Digest: R v Ahpay, 2018 SKQB 147
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Law Society Case Digests
    • May 18, 2018
    ...172 Sask R 235, 185 WAC 235 R v Sawchuk, 2014 SKCA 88, [2015] 1 WWR 334, 442 Sask R 164, 17 CBR (6th) 41, 315 CCC (3d) 153 R v Slippery, 2015 SKCA 149, 472 Sask R 181 R v Smith, 2008 SKCA 20, [2008] 4 WWR 27, 307 Sask R 45, 232 CCC (3d) 176, 78 WCB (2d) 269 R v Summers, 2014 SCC 26, [2014] ......
  • R. v. L.V., (2016) 480 Sask.R. 181 (CA)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
    • June 13, 2016
    ...or mitigating factor and that error had an impact on the sentence. ... to the extent that this Court's decision in R. v. Slippery , 2015 SKCA 149, might be read as saying that an appeal court may intervene in a sentencing decision if the sentence is demonstrably unfit, it should not be foll......
  • Digest: R v J.P., 2018 SKQB 96
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Law Society Case Digests
    • March 27, 2018
    ...2017 ONCJ 644, 142 WCB (2d) 126 R v Rudolph, 2012 SKQB 442, 410 Sask R 134 R v Sharpe, 2002 BCPC 387, 2002 CarswellBC 2276 R v Slippery, 2015 SKCA 149, 472 Sask R 181 R v Stonechild, 2017 SKQB 138, 139 WCB (2d) 84 R v Thomas, 2009 BCCA 233, 272 BCAC 127 R v Whitehead, 2016 SKCA 165, 344 CCC......
  • Digest: R v J.P., 2018 SKQB 96
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Law Society Case Digests
    • March 18, 2019
    ...2017 ONCJ 644, 142 WCB (2d) 126 R v Rudolph, 2012 SKQB 442, 410 Sask R 134 R v Sharpe, 2002 BCPC 387, 2002 CarswellBC 2276 R v Slippery, 2015 SKCA 149, 472 Sask R 181 R v Stonechild, 2017 SKQB 138, 139 WCB (2d) 84 R v Thomas, 2009 BCCA 233, 272 BCAC 127 R v Whitehead, 2016 SKCA 165, 344 CCC......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
34 cases
  • R. v. L.V., (2016) 480 Sask.R. 181 (CA)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
    • June 13, 2016
    ...or mitigating factor and that error had an impact on the sentence. ... to the extent that this Court's decision in R. v. Slippery , 2015 SKCA 149, might be read as saying that an appeal court may intervene in a sentencing decision if the sentence is demonstrably unfit, it should not be foll......
  • R. v. MOOSTOOS, 2017 SKQB 12
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • January 16, 2017
    ...intermediate extent. [41] As Wilkinson J. commented in R v Delorme, 2017 SKCA 3 at para 54 [Delorme], both Chanalquay and R v Slippery, 2015 SKCA 149, 472 Sask R 181 [Slippery] “call for a focused analysis on the question whether Gladue factors may, in the circumstances unique to the Aborig......
  • R. v. Sark, 2020 PECA 9
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court, Appeal Division (Prince Edward Island)
    • September 30, 2020
    ...R. v. Park, [2014] N.J. No. 158, 349 Nfld. & PEIR. 307 (N.L.Prov.Ct.); R. v. Blind, 2008 BCCA 310 (BCCA); R. v. Slippery, 2015 SKCA 149; R. v. Lawrence Michael Johnson, 2004 NSSC 221; R. v. Brian Joshua Johnson, 2007 NSCA 102; R. v. Kelly, 2014 NLCA 9; R. v. Delaney, [2012] N.J. No. 412......
  • R. v. J.P., 2018 SKQB 96
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • March 27, 2018
    ...the application of s. 718.2(e) in a series of four decisions, R v Chanalquay, 2015 SKCA 141, 472 Sask R 110 [Chanalquay]; R v Slippery, 2015 SKCA 149, 472 Sask R 181; R v Whitehead, 2016 SKCA 165, 344 CCC (3d) 1; and R v Delorme, 2017 SKCA 3. In Chanalquay, Richards C.J.S. summarized the co......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 books & journal articles
  • Digest: R v Ahpay, 2018 SKQB 147
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Law Society Case Digests
    • May 18, 2018
    ...172 Sask R 235, 185 WAC 235 R v Sawchuk, 2014 SKCA 88, [2015] 1 WWR 334, 442 Sask R 164, 17 CBR (6th) 41, 315 CCC (3d) 153 R v Slippery, 2015 SKCA 149, 472 Sask R 181 R v Smith, 2008 SKCA 20, [2008] 4 WWR 27, 307 Sask R 45, 232 CCC (3d) 176, 78 WCB (2d) 269 R v Summers, 2014 SCC 26, [2014] ......
  • Digest: R v J.P., 2018 SKQB 96
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Law Society Case Digests
    • March 27, 2018
    ...2017 ONCJ 644, 142 WCB (2d) 126 R v Rudolph, 2012 SKQB 442, 410 Sask R 134 R v Sharpe, 2002 BCPC 387, 2002 CarswellBC 2276 R v Slippery, 2015 SKCA 149, 472 Sask R 181 R v Stonechild, 2017 SKQB 138, 139 WCB (2d) 84 R v Thomas, 2009 BCCA 233, 272 BCAC 127 R v Whitehead, 2016 SKCA 165, 344 CCC......
  • Digest: R v J.P., 2018 SKQB 96
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Law Society Case Digests
    • March 18, 2019
    ...2017 ONCJ 644, 142 WCB (2d) 126 R v Rudolph, 2012 SKQB 442, 410 Sask R 134 R v Sharpe, 2002 BCPC 387, 2002 CarswellBC 2276 R v Slippery, 2015 SKCA 149, 472 Sask R 181 R v Stonechild, 2017 SKQB 138, 139 WCB (2d) 84 R v Thomas, 2009 BCCA 233, 272 BCAC 127 R v Whitehead, 2016 SKCA 165, 344 CCC......
  • Digest: R v Kurek, 2018 SKQB 168
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Law Society Case Digests
    • June 18, 2018
    ...Rodgers, 2012 SKQB 80, 394 Sask R 152 R v R.R.F., 2008 SKCA 52, 310 Sask R 124 R v Shorting, 2009 SKCA 102, 337 Sask R 134 R v Slippery, 2015 SKCA 149, 472 Sask R 181 R v Whitehead, 2016 SKCA 165, 344 CCC (3d) 1 R v Yuzicapi, 2011 SKCA 134, 377 Sask R 133 WCB (2d) 115 R v Gladue, [1999] 1 S......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT