R. v. Sweeney (R.N.), (2004) 185 Man.R.(2d) 69 (PC)

• Judge: Devine, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: April 21, 2004
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (2004), 185 Man.R.(2d) 69 (PC)

R. v. Sweeney (R.N.) (2004), 185 Man.R.(2d) 69 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2004] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. MY.036

Her Majesty The Queen v. Richard Norman Sweeney

Indexed As: R. v. Sweeney (R.N.)

Manitoba Provincial Court

Devine, P.C.J.

April 21, 2004.

Summary:

The accused pled guilty to impaired driving and driving while disqualified from doing so. Given prior offences, he faced a mandatory minimum sentence of 90 days' imprisonment. The accused sought a curative discharge pursuant to s. 255(5) of the Criminal Code.

The Manitoba Provincial Court dismissed the application.

Criminal Law - Topic 4434

Procedure - Verdicts - Discharges and dismissals - Discharge conditional upon curative treatment - The accused (age 61) pled guilty to impaired driving and driving while disqualified from doing so - Alcoholic most his adult life - This was his seventh alcohol related driving offence - Ninth driving while disqualified conviction - He faced a mandatory minimum jail sentence - He sought a curative discharge (Criminal Code, s. 255(5)) - Went through 30 day treatment program in 1998 and maintained sobriety for "some" months - Allegedly had not drank since offences occurred (December 1991) - Maintained sobriety by structuring his life to eliminate temptations - Saw a behavioural psychologist once a month - Lived alone - Naive about his problem and his plan to maintain future sobriety - Retiring from work in the near future - No evidence from family, family doctors, employer, etc. - The Manitoba Provincial Court dismissed the application - The court was not sufficiently confident of the accused's likely rehabilitation to find that it would not be contrary to the public interest to discharge him.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Storr (R.L.) (1995), 174 A.R. 65; 102 W.A.C. 65 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 3].

Counsel:

G. Bayly, for the Crown;

R. Rolston, for the accused.

This application was heard before Devine, P.C.J., of the Manitoba Provincial Court, who delivered the following reasons for decision on April 21, 2004.