R. v. Sparks (A.) et al.,

• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Judge: Williams, P.C.J.
• Neutral Citation: 2007 NSPC 5
• Court: Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Subject Matter: CRIMINAL LAW
• Date: 01 February 2007

R. v. Sparks (A.) (2007), 251 N.S.R.(2d) 181 (PC);

    802 A.P.R. 181

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2007] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. FE.021

Her Majesty The Queen v. Aaron Sparks, Devon Wright and Germaine Beals

(1547677; 1547678; 1547679; 2007 NSPC 5)

Indexed As: R. v. Sparks (A.) et al.

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Williams, P.C.J.

February 1, 2007.

Summary:

The accused (Sparks, Wright and Beals), in a judgment reported [2006] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 113; 2006 NSPC 45, were convicted of aggravated assault in a beating which wounded and endangered the life of the victim.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court sentenced Beals and Wrigth to six years' imprisonment, less 44 and 28 months' credit respectively for pre-trial custody. Sparks, who had a more positive pre-sentence report and lack of a criminal record, was sentenced to five years' imprisonment.

Criminal Law - Topic 5381

Evidence and witnesses - Documents and reports - Victim impact statements - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5834.2 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5832

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Rehabilitation - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5938 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5833

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Deterrence - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5938 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5834.2

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Effect on victim (incl. victim impact statement) - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court stated that, pursuant to s. 722 of the Criminal Code and the Department of Justice's General Notice Regarding Victim Impact Statement Content, the content of a victim impact statement was restricted to personal and relevant information concerning the harm and loss suffered by the victim - Victim impact statements "should not be structured so as to foster or encourage any element of personal revenge" - Further, "they should not contain criticisms of the offender, statements about the facts or presumed facts of the case or recommendations or suggestions as to punishment" - The court exercised its jurisdiction to examine a victim impact statement to ensure appropriate content and compliance with statutory conditions before admitting the statement or permitting the statement to be read into the court's record - The court exercised its jurisdiction to excise impermissible and irrelevant portions of the statement, offering the victims an opportunity to read the vetted statement into the court record - See paragraphs 6 to 19.

Criminal Law - Topic 5848.7

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Denunciation or repudiation of conduct - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5938 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5938

Sentence - Aggravated assault - The accused (Sparks, Wright and Beals) were convicted of aggravated assault after committing an unprovoked, savage assault causing the victim serious injuries - The helpless victim was kicked and stomped on by the accused - As the victim subsequently died from a gunshot wound for which the accused were not responsible, the full extent of the injuries caused by the accused was unknown - The accused were all 21 or 22 years of age - Sparks had a clean record - Beals had a lengthy youth record for violent offences - Wright had narcotics and weapons convictions - Beals and Wright were assessed as recidivists for whom conditional sentences were inappropriate - Sparks was assessed as not needing rehabilitation - None of the accused graduated or were steadily employed, although the vicious assault was considered out of character - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court, balancing denunciation and deterrence with the rehabilitative prospects for the accused, held that imprisonment was required - Beals and Wright were sentenced to six years' imprisonment, less 44 and 28 months' credit respectively for pre-trial custody - Sparks, who had a more positive pre-sentence report and no criminal record, was sentenced to five years' imprisonment - See paragraphs 20 to 53.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Bremner (R.) (2000), 138 B.C.A.C. 200; 226 W.A.C. 200; 146 C.C.C.(3d) 59 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. P.D., [2000] O.T.C. 902 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Gabriel (R.) (1999), 98 O.T.C. 193 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 11].

Baron et al. v. Minister of National Revenue et al., [1993] 1 S.C.R. 416; 146 N.R. 270, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Stone (B.T.), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 290; 239 N.R. 201; 123 B.C.A.C. 1; 201 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. McQuaid (H.) et al. (1996), 149 N.S.R.(2d) 104; 432 A.P.R. 104 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 35].

R. v. R.J.W. (2002), 211 N.S.R.(2d) 239; 662 A.P.R. 239; 2003 NSPC 1, refd to. [para. 43].

R. v. Giles (1989), 93 N.S.R.(2d) 317; 242 A.P.R. 317 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 44].

R. v. Silvea (1988), 86 N.S.R.(2d) 346; 218 A.P.R. 346 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 45].

R. v. Dixon (S.) (1997), 156 N.S.R.(2d) 81; 461 A.P.R. 81 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 46].

R. v. Proulx (J.K.D.) (2000), 249 N.R. 201; 142 Man.R.(2d) 161; 212 W.A.C. 161 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Brady (J.R.) (1998), 209 A.R. 321; 160 W.A.C. 321; 121 C.C.C.(3d) 504 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Maheu (1997), 116 C.C.C.(3d) 361 (Que. C.A.), refd to. [para. 51].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 722(1) [para. 4]; sect. 722(2)(b), sect. 722(2.1) [para. 3]; sect. 722(4) [para. 2].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Manson, Allan, The Law of Sentencing (2001), c. 8 [para. 13].

Counsel:

J. Whalen and R. Fetterly, for the Crown;

R. Jones, for the accused, Beals;

P. Borden, for the accused, Wright;

K. Serbu, for the accused, Sparks.

This matter was heard before Williams, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment orally on February 1, 2007.