R. v. Woolridge (B.), (2015) 372 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 179 (NLTD(G))

• Judge: Thompson, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada)
• Case Date: September 01, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (2015), 372 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 179 (NLTD(G))

R. v. Woolridge (B.) (2015), 372 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 179 (NLTD(G));

    1158 A.P.R. 179

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] Nfld. & P.E.I.R. TBEd. SE.006

Her Majesty the Queen v. Brandon Woolridge

(201501G1006; 2015 NLTD(G) 114)

Indexed As: R. v. Woolridge (B.)

Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court

Trial Division (General)

Thompson, J.

September 2, 2015.

Summary:

The accused pleaded guilty to four weapons charges, one threat to destroy property, one forceable confinement, one breach of recognizance and one operating a motor vehicle without a licence (the first offences). He was remanded into custody from April 27, 2014 until May 7, 2014, at which point he was released on a recognizance. On September 25, 2015, he was remanded on consent for armed robbery and other offences (the subsequent charges). The prior process was not formally withdrawn. The accused remained in custody until the sentencing hearing for the initial offences. A joint sentencing submission for the first offences factored in the remand time from April 27, 2014, to the date of the sentencing hearing. The sentencing judge concluded that he lacked jurisdiction to consider the remand time for the subsequent charges when sentencing for the first offences. A revised joint submission was made, factoring in the remand time from April 27, 2014 to May 7, 2014.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court accepted the revised joint submission and sentenced the accused accordingly. Seven weeks later, the Crown withdrew the subsequent charges. The accused appealed the sentence, requesting credit for the remand time for the subsequent offences.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Trial Division (General), allowed the appeal and reduced the sentence to time served.

Criminal Law - Topic 5813

Sentencing - Sentencing procedure and rights of accused - Plea bargain or joint submission - Effect of - The accused pleaded guilty to eight offences (the first offences) - He was remanded into custody from April 27, 2014 until May 7, 2014, at which point he was released on a recognizance - On September 25, 2014, he was remanded on consent for armed robbery and other offences (the subsequent charges) - The prior process was not formally withdrawn - The accused remained in custody until the sentencing hearing for the initial offences - A joint sentencing submission for the first offences factored in the remand time from April 27, 2014, to the date of the sentencing hearing - The sentencing judge concluded that he lacked jurisdiction to consider the remand time for the subsequent charges when sentencing for the first offences - A revised joint submission was made, factoring in the remand time from April 27, 2014 to May 7, 2014 - The sentencing judge accepted the revised joint submission and sentenced the accused accordingly - Seven weeks later, the Crown withdrew the subsequent charges - The accused appealed the sentence, requesting credit for the remand time for the subsequent charges - The Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Trial Division (General), stated that, had the sentencing judge been apprised of the Crown's consideration of withdrawing the subsequent charges, he would have been able to reasonably and logically conclude that the related time in custody was rendered nugatory and could be considered as part of the complete picture for assessing the accused - It was implicit that bail was appropriately denied for the subsequent charges, in part, because he was on bail for the first offences - The court was entitled to consider the new evidence of the withdrawal of the subsequent charges, imply withdrawal of the prior process, and attribute the time in custody from September 25, 2014 onward to the first offences - Also, the accused had the benefit of a Crown undertaking on his plea of guilty that such credit would be requested - The court allowed the appeal and reduced the sentence to time served - See paragraphs 6 to 18.

Criminal Law - Topic 5848.2

Sentencing - Considerations on imposing sentence - Time already served (incl. bail) - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5813 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 6218

Sentencing - Appeals - Variation of sentence - Evidence on appeal - Fresh evidence - [See Criminal Law - Topic 5813 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Wilson (R.) (2008), 240 O.A.C. 59; 2008 ONCA 510, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Tsai (S.G.) (2005), 199 O.A.C. 244; 198 C.C.C.(3d) 533 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Druken (J.K.) (2006), 261 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 271; 790 A.P.R. 271; 215 C.C.C.(3d) 394; 2006 NLCA 67, refd to. [para. 14].

Counsel:

Natalie A. Payne, for the Crown;

Michelle E.S. Wilson, for the accused.

This appeal was heard at St. John's, N.L., on September 1, 2015, by Thompson, J., of the Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Trial Division (General), who released the following edited transcript of the oral reasons which were delivered on September 2, 2015.