R. v. Maxwell, 2013 ONCJ 840

CITATION: R. v. Maxwell , 2013 ONCJ 840 DATE: 2013·02·28 COURT FILE No. 12-07764: Central East Region-Newmarket COURT FILE No. 13-00036: Central East Region-Newmarket ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN — AND — MATTHEW MAXWELL Before Justice Peter C. West Sentencing Judgment February 28, 2013 Ms. M. Montemurro................................................................................................... for the Crown Mr. J. Chapnik.......................................................................................................... for the accused WEST J.: Introduction [ 1 ] Mr.

Maxwell (DOB: […], 1989) entered guilty pleas to charges of assault (x3); assault causing bodily harm; uttering death threats (x2); break and enter; criminal harassment by repeated communication and fail to comply with probation. An agreed statement of facts was filed as Exhibit 2, which sets out the circumstances surrounding the offences to which Mr. Maxwell entered pleas of guilty. He was arrested on these charges on July 18, 2012 and has remained in custody. Mr. Maxwell was involved in an on-and-off again domestic relationship with Ms. Renee Fisher (DOB: […], 1990) for approximately six years.

They have a son, Anthony Maxwell, who was born on […], 2011. [ 2 ] It was always Mr. Maxwell’s intention to plead guilty to the charges he was facing and he signed an undertaking to plead guilty (Exhibit 6) on September 20, 2012. Through no fault of his own, the charges which Mr. Maxwell faced in Peel Region were not transferred to the Newmarket Crown’s office for many months. [ 3 ] The Crown concedes that pursuant to section 719(3.1) of the Criminal Code Mr.

Maxwell should receive credit for pretrial custody on a one and one-half days for each day spent in custody from September 20, 2012 until the date of his sentencing given that his sentencing was not delayed for any reason attributable to him. In my view, the entire time spent in pre-trial custody by Mr. Maxwell should be credited on a one and one-half day for each day basis. None of the delay was caused by Mr. Maxwell, in fact, I was advised by Mr. Chapnik that it was always his client’s instruction to accept responsibility for his actions and plead guilty. The two months prior to Mr.

Maxwell signing the undertaking to plead guilty would have involved the Crown providing disclosure of the charges and Mr. Chapnik meeting with the Crown for resolution discussions. [ 4 ] The Crown’s position is that because these charges relate to a third victim of domestic assault by Mr. Maxwell that the appropriate sentence is one of two years less a day in the reformatory less any credit given for pre-trial custody. It is the Crown’s position that the principles of general and specific deterrence and denunciation are paramount in the determination of a fit sentence for domestic violence. Ms.

Montemurro points to Mr. Maxwell’s criminal record and the following additional aggravating factors: the offences were committed in respect of Mr. Maxwell’s common law spouse (section 718.2(a)(ii)) and the fact that the assaultive conduct continued over a prolonged period of time. [ 5 ] It was the position of the defence that Mr. Maxwell’s aboriginal status must be considered in determining an appropriate sentence pursuant to the principles set out in R. v. Gladue . [1] Further, Mr.

Maxwell’s acceptance of responsibility for his conduct and his early decision to plead guilty are mitigating circumstances in the determination of sentence. Mr. Chapnik also points to the steps taken by Mr. Maxwell in seeking assistance for his drug and alcohol additions while he has been incarcerated at the Central East Correctional Centre in Lindsay. Further, Mr. Maxwell has been accepted into a residential treatment program offered by the Salvation Army at the Ottawa Booth Centre. [ 6 ] It is the defence position that having regard to Mr.

Maxwell’s youthful age and his aboriginal background that the time he has spent in pre-trial custody is sufficient to address the principles of general and specific deterrence and denunciation. It is Mr. Chapnik’s submission that, in Mr. Maxwell’s particular circumstances, the principle of rehabilitation is an important consideration in determining an appropriate sentence.

Facts Relating to the Offences [ 7 ] The assaultive and threatening behaviour by Mr. Maxwell towards Ms. Fisher, which is the subject-matter of the charges before the court, is set out in detail in the Agreed Statement of Facts (Exhibit 2). (

a) Summer of 2010 (Assault Causing Bodily Harm, Mr. Maxwell punched and kicked Ms. Fisher causing a bump on her head and a broken nose); (

b) March 2011(Assault, Mr. Maxwell kneed Ms. Fisher in the stomach when she was six months pregnant with their son, pushed her to the ground and kicked her in the head causing her to lose consciousness, her face was bruised and swollen); (

c) February 11, 2012 (No charge, Mr. Maxwell punched Ms. Fisher in the eye, causing a black eye); (

d) May 12, 2012 (Assault x2 and Threatening Death, Mr. Maxwell was upset that Ms. Fisher planned to work at a lounge, “On the Rocks”, Mr. Maxwell became upset because he believed she planned to work as a stripper, he grabbed her by her neck, choked her, pushed her against a wall, tore her shirt exposing her breasts and told her that now she looked like a stripper. He slapped her across the face with both hands and called her a bitch and a “hoe.” Later that same day, at 3 a.m., while she was sleeping, Mr. Maxwell jumped on her and began to choke her again; he told her that if she left him he would kill her.

He also punched her repeatedly on the right arm/shoulder area, on the chest and on her back. Ms. Fisher has scars on her chest as a result of this assault. Later the same morning, around 7 a.m., Mr. Maxwell got into an argument with Ms. Fisher and pushed her against a wall, choked her, slapped her and bit her cheek. He threatened to kill her. Ms. Fisher went to her mother’s house and Mr. Maxwell followed her and during a verbal argument he punched her in the face with a closed fist, causing her to fall to the ground. When she said she was going to call the police Mr. Maxwell told her, “This ain’t over”); (

e) May 27, 2012 (Threatening Death, Mr. Maxwell, in two text messages, threatened to kill Ms. Fisher, her brother and her mother because she had complained to the police); (

f) July 16 to 18, 2012 (Break and Enter, Mr. Maxwell broke into Ms. Fisher’s apartment in Brampton and stole her laptop, her cell phone and various pieces of identification belonging to Ms. Fisher and their son, Anthony); (

g) July 16 to 18, 2012 (Criminal Harassment, Mr. Maxwell called Ms. Fisher and text messaged her approximately 600 times asking her to meet with him. While Ms. Fisher was speaking with the police he left her a message on her phone calling her names and threatening to kill her and sent her text messages telling her he was going to shoot her); (

h) Mr. Maxwell was placed on probation after his last conviction in November 2011. He reported to a probation officer after his release from custody and then missed several appointments. He last reported to probation on April 30, 2012. He did not report to probation as required on May 30, 2012 and has not reported since then. [ 8 ] There can be little doubt that Ms. Fisher was subjected to a repeated pattern of domestic abuse by Mr. Maxwell between the summer of 2010 and July 2012 that can only be described as despicable and deplorable. [ 9 ] I was advised by Ms.

Montemurro that the Victim Witness office had requested that Ms. Fisher provide a Victim Impact Statement; however, she declined to do so. The probation officer in the Pre-sentence Report initially indicates (at p. 4) that despite attempts to obtain input from the victim, she did not return his calls. Later in his report (at p. 5), the probation officer indicates that he did speak to Ms. Fisher, who indicated that she had “natural concerns” for the safety of herself and her son and was of the opinion that Mr. Maxwell would benefit from counselling for his anger and controlling behaviours. Ms.

Fisher advised the probation officer that she did not wish to provide a Victim Impact Statement. [ 10 ] There is reference in the Agreed Statement of Facts that Mr. Maxwell had engaged in assaultive and threatening behaviour towards Ms. Fisher since 2007; however, no specifics or details or the frequency of this conduct was provided for the period 2007 and the summer of 2010. Facts Surrounding the Offender [ 11 ] Mr. Maxwell is 23 years of age. He struggled in school and stopped going when he was in Grade 10. He has difficulty with reading and spelling.

He was not employed at the time of his arrest in July 2012 and had been relying on Ontario Works to support himself. [ 12 ] He has two sisters, Crystal Maxwell, 27 years old and Jennifer Maxwell, 26 years old. Mr. Maxwell has aboriginal roots, Ojibwe, on his mother’s side and Mi’kmaq, on his father’s side of the family. [2] Mr. Maxwell’s parents divorced when he was six years old. A Gladue report was prepared for Justice Clements in November 2011 to assist in determining an appropriate sentence for Mr.

Maxwell in respect of domestic violence charges that he faced. [ 13 ] It is reflected in the Gladue report that both Mr. Maxwell and his sister, Jennifer, recounted details of physical, mental and emotional abuse perpetrated by their father against all members of the family. Mr. Maxwell’s mother became heavily addicted to drugs and alcohol after her divorce. It has only been since 2007 that Mr. Maxwell’s mother has overcome her addictions. The family always lived in Metro Housing and high needs neighbourhoods and frequently moved between complexes because of their father tracking the family down. [ 14 ] Mr.

Maxwell did not speak until he was five years of age and he spent a number of years working with speech therapists. Mr. Maxwell witnessed and experienced the abuse inflicted by his father. After his parents’ divorce he was present on many occasions when his mother abused both drugs and alcohol. Further, it is reflected in the Gladue report that his mother was often physically assaulted by her drug dealers when she could not pay her drug debts. Mr. Maxwell witnessed these events throughout his formative years.

[ 15 ] At the age of 16, Mr. Maxwell became a father to a little girl, Mikela, born […], 2006, to his then girlfriend. It was after the birth of his daughter, with the pressures of being a young father that his drinking increased. A threatening charge, which was part of the subject-matter of the Gladue report, related to this girlfriend, where Mr. Maxwell threatened her because of her indication that she was planning to return to the United States with their daughter. Mr. Maxwell also has a son, Anthony, born on […], 2011, with the victim, Ms. Fisher. [ 16 ] Mr. Maxwell has a criminal record both as a youth and as an adult.

(1) Toronto (Youth Court), March 4, 2008, Fail to Comply Recognizance: Probation 18 months

(2) Oshawa (Youth Court), March 7, 2008, Possession of

Schedule 1 Substance for Purpose of Trafficking: Probation 18 months.

(3) Toronto, Ontario, June 8, 2010, Traffic in

Schedule 1 Substance: 12 Months Conditional Sentence and Mandatory Prohibition Order s. 109.

(4) Toronto, Ontario, November 18, 2011, Assault, Utter Death Threats x3, Assault Causing Bodily Harm, Unlawfully in a Dwelling House: 80 Days (+100 days PTC) & Probation for 2 years. [ 17 ] It was submitted by Mr. Chapnik that Mr. Maxwell intended to plead guilty and accept responsibility for his actions towards Ms. Fisher since his arrest in July 2012. He signed an undertaking to plead guilty to the Brampton charges in September 2012. Unfortunately, those charges were not sent to Newmarket until January 3, 2013. Mr.

Maxwell entered guilty pleas to a number of the charges he was facing on January 21, 2013 and the matter was adjourned to February 19, 2013 to allow for the preparation of a pre- sentence report. [ 18 ] Mr. Maxwell’s plea of guilty meant that Ms. Fisher was spared the necessity of having to testify in court. His plea has also saved the administration of justice both time and cost in adjudicating this matter. [ 19 ] Further, Mr. Maxwell expressed to the court his remorse for his actions and conduct towards Ms. Fisher. This is also reflected in the pre-sentence report (at p. 2) where Mr.

Maxwell acknowledged to the probation officer that he was ashamed for his behaviour and that he recognized that his actions amounted to “power and control” over Ms. Fisher. [ 20 ] Mr. Maxwell admits that he has addictions to alcohol and cocaine. Mr. Chapnik submitted to me that Mr. Maxwell was involved in the trafficking of drugs to support his own drug use. [ 21 ] Mr. Maxwell told me that he knows that he needs to get help for the future and that he owes it to his family and to himself to do this. The pre-sentence report is quite negative towards Mr.

Maxwell’s response on his last probation towards counselling for his addictions and anger control issues. As I have already indicated there are some inconsistencies in the pre-sentence report. This is one of those areas where the pre-sentence report is inconsistent with the letters that were provided to me by Mr. Chapnik (Exhibit 3) from the Central East Correctional Centre and from the Salvation Army, Ottawa Booth Centre. Ms. Vicki La Porte, Addictions Counsellor at CECC, with whose work at CECC I am very familiar, writes in a letter, dated February 8, 2013, that Mr.

Maxwell has met with her on a number of occasions for counselling for substance abuse and mental health issues. In addition, he has worked through a number of self-help workbooks that he has been provided. It is Ms. La Porte’s opinion that Mr. Maxwell suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, from his childhood experiences and possibly Acquired Brain Injury and Anxiety from his past. It is also Ms. La Porte’s opinion that Mr. Maxwell uses drugs and alcohol to bury the trauma he was exposed to as a child. [ 22 ] Ms. La Porte assisted Mr.

Maxwell in completing an Intake and Assessment package for residential treatment at the Salvation Army Anchorage program at Ottawa Booth Centre. Mr. Maxwell was accepted into stabilization housing at the Ottawa Booth Centre and then into the 4 month residential treatment program. Ms. La Porte is very supportive of Mr. Maxwell becoming involved in this programme as it will deal with his issues. [ 23 ] There is also a confirming letter, dated November 8, 2012, from Mr. Ben Bridgstock, Director of Addiction Services at The Salvation Army Ottawa Booth Centre, accepting Mr.

Maxwell into the Salvation Army Anchorage Drug and Alcohol stabilization programme on March 4, 2013 or soon thereafter. My understanding from Mr. Chapnik is that there is a bed available for Mr. Maxwell. [ 24 ] Mr. Maxwell has indicated to me that he now recognizes that he needs to get professional assistance for his personal problems, his anger and his addictions. In my view, this recognition is important when I consider the prospects of his future rehabilitation.

Analysis : [ 25 ] The determination of a proper sentence in this case calls for a consideration and balancing of the principles of sentencing set out in ss. 718 to 718.2 of the Criminal Code , as well as the aggravating and mitigating factors which exist in this case. I have set out above the various mitigating factors which I must consider in determining an appropriate sentence. [ 26 ] The assault, threatening and criminal harassment charges in this case were all committed in a domestic context – a statutorily recognized aggravating factor under s. 718.2(a)(ii).

Further, in my view, it is an aggravating factor that the assaultive behaviour took place in the family home where the complainant should have been free from harm or violence. [ 27 ] Mr. Maxwell has a criminal record, which reflects his involvement in the drug trade and to some extent supports his position that he sold drugs to support his own addiction to cocaine. In addition, he has convictions for similar offences involving two previous domestic partners, which I find is an aggravating factor to be considered on sentence.

It should be noted that some of the offences before me were committed in the same time period, namely, the summer of 2010 and the spring of 2011, when the offences involving the other two domestic partners were committed.

[ 28 ] When the Gladue report was prepared by Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto, Ms. Fisher provided information as Mr. Maxwell’s current girlfriend and the mother of his youngest child. Mr. Maxwell was in custody during the preparation of that report. Ms. Fisher was very supportive of him and advised the author of the report that they intended to commence living together after he was released from custody. It would appear that Mr.

Maxwell either did not take advantage of treatment/counselling opportunities that his probation officer directed him to or there were delays in his accessing treatment or counselling programs. The result was that in February and May 2012, Mr. Maxwell once again engaged in assaultive and threatening behaviour towards someone he was in an intimate relationship with, namely, Ms. Fisher. It was submitted by the Crown, and I agree, that this was an aggravating factor on sentence. Mr. Maxwell was on probation for offences involving domestic violence when he committed a number of the offences involving Ms.

Fisher. [ 29 ] There is no doubt that domestic violence is a serious recurring social problem in Canadian society. A five member panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal addressed the prevalence of domestic violence in the case of R. v. Inwood. [3] Chief Justice Howland made these comments concerning domestic violence, which are equally applicable today (at p. 181): This court has acted on the principle that where there is a serious offence involving violence to the person, then general and individual deterrence must be the paramount considerations in sentencing in order to protect the public.

In my opinion, this principle is applicable not only to violence between strangers but also to domestic violence. Domestic assaults are not private matters, and spouses are entitled to protection from violence just as strangers are. This does not mean in every instance of domestic violence a custodial sentence should be imposed, but that it should be normal where significant bodily harm has been inflicted, in order to repudiate and denounce such conduct.

I am pointing out later that battered wives, where there are persistent or prolonged assaults, may require special consideration in determining the appropriate punishment . [ Emphasis added ] [ 30 ] It is clear from the caselaw that when sentencing an offender for a crime of domestic violence a judge must emphasize the principles of denunciation, general and specific deterrence: see Regina v. Pitkeathly [4] , Regina v. Boucher [5] , Regina v. Edwards and Levo [6] , Regina v. Campbell [7] , Regina v. Denkers [8] . [ 31 ] Ms.

Montemurro has provided me with a casebook containing a number of sentencing decisions from the Ontario Court of Appeal: R. v. Bates [9] , and Inwood, supra, as well as two of my own cases, R. v. Harry [10] and R. v. Meade [11] . No two cases involving domestic violence will be identical in terms of the underlying circumstances or the background of the offender. I have reviewed a number of other sentencing decisions which delineate the sentencing principles to be applied: R. v. Chirimar [12] , R. v. Rooplall [13] ; R. v. Harding [14] ; R. v. Markotic [15] ; and R. v. Shunmuganathan [16] .

What becomes clear is that the determination of an appropriate sentence must be based upon the unique circumstances surrounding the offence and the offender. [ 32 ] Although denunciation and deterrence are of paramount importance in domestic violence cases, rehabilitation of an offender, who has shown insight into the causes underlying his assaultive behaviour and who is motivated to seek professional assistance, is still a relevant sentencing consideration. It is my view, that Mr.

Maxwell’s prospects for being successfully rehabilitated are significantly increased because of his recognition that he needs professional assistance and the fact that he has already begun to avail himself of the programs available in the correctional facility in which he is incarcerated. Further, I am also of the view, based on the material before me, that if Mr. Maxwell does not receive the counselling and treatment that he needs to address the underlying causes of his criminal behaviour, particularly towards any future intimate partners, he will re-offend. In my opinion, it is essential for Mr.

Maxwell to receive counselling and treatment to address his issues in order to ensure that the public is protected. [ 33 ] I have set out above the aggravating factors surrounding Mr. Maxwell’s offences and it is my view that assaultive and threatening behaviour, in a domestic context, require a lengthy custodial sentence in order to reflect the required denunciation of the offence and to address the principal of general deterrence, which plays a significant role in sentencing of cases involving domestic abuse.

Further, the principle of specific deterrence is an important consideration on the facts of this case given that Mr. Maxwell assaulted Ms. Fisher, causing a black eye, just a short time after being released from custody on similar charges. Obviously, Mr. Maxwell did not learn from the sentence imposed by Justice Clements in November 2011.

Despite the increase in public awareness which has been brought about through media attention to the tragic consequences which often result from domestic violence, these types of offences remain common and although progress has been made, like minded individuals must continue to be reminded that the Court will take these matters seriously, and that jail is the norm, as opposed to the exception, for serious assaults in a domestic context.

See Inwood, supra . [ 34 ] However, as I indicated to counsel during their submissions, it is my opinion that a sentence of two years less a day is well outside the appropriate range of sentence having regard to Mr. Maxwell’s personal circumstances and the circumstances surrounding the commission of the offences. Mr. Maxwell will have served the equivalent of 339 days in pre-trial custody (226 days x 1.5), which is almost one year. Having regard to Mr.

Maxwell’s youthful age, his difficult and unfortunate upbringing, his Aboriginal status and the fact that his last sentence was six months, an appropriate sentence would be a custodial sentence in the range of 9 to 12 months. [ 35 ] Mr. Maxwell, if you would stand please. [ 36 ] Consequently, in respect of the domestic violence charges relating to Ms.

Fisher; namely, Uttering Death Threats (x2), Assault (x3), Assault Causing Bodily Harm, Break and Enter, and Criminal Harassment, it is my view, having regard to the aggravating and mitigating factors that I have outlined, and considering the credit of 339 days of pre-trial custody, a suspended sentence and probation for three years with terms is warranted in this case. [ 37 ] It is my view, however, that the Fail to Comply with Probation should be dealt with by way of a separate sentence, which will be consecutive to the sentence I am imposing in respect of the charges relating to Ms. Fisher.

This is a breach of a court order, which is a serious offence. Further, it was the Crown’s submission that the reason you failed to report to your probation officer was because you were aware that the police had issued a warrant for your arrest in respect the domestic violence charges relating to Ms. Fisher after she went to the police in May of 2012. It was the Crown’s position that these circumstances were aggravating and I agree. [ 38 ] You will therefore be sentenced to a further sentence of four months in custody, which I am permitting you to serve in the community pursuant to a conditional sentence under

section 742.1 of the Criminal Code . I am satisfied that the service of this sentence in

the community will not endanger the safety of the community and is consistent with the fundamental purpose and principles of sentencing set out in sections 718 to 718.2 of the Criminal Code . The Crown proceeded by indictment on this charge and under

section 733.1 of the Criminal Code, the maximum sentence is two years in custody and there is no minimum period of incarceration. Consequently, all of the prerequisites to a conditional sentence are met. [ 39 ] It is my opinion that the terms I intend to include in this conditional sentence will serve to protect the public from your committing further criminal offences in the future. They will also be of considerable assistance in your rehabilitation.

You have indicated to me that you wish to become involved in the Anchorage Treatment program, which is run by the Salvation Army at the Ottawa Booth Centre, 171 George Street, Ottawa, Ontario. It is the belief of Ms. La Porte at CECC that this program will greatly assist you in overcoming your addictions and in dealing with the underlying causes. [ 40 ] The statutory terms of this four month conditional sentence are as follows:

(1) Keep the peace and be of good behaviour;

(2) Appear before the court when required to do so by the court;

(3) Report no later than March 8, 2013, in person to a supervisor and thereafter as required;

(4) Remain within the Province of Ontario unless written permission to go outside the Province is obtained from the court or your supervisor; and

(5) Notify the supervisor in advance of any change of name or address, and promptly notify the supervisor of any change in employment or occupation. [ 41 ] In addition, Mr. Maxwell, you will be subject to the following terms:

(1) Abstain absolutely from the use, possession and consumption of all alcoholic beverages and non-medically prescribed drugs;

(2) Abstain from owning, possessing or carrying any WEAPON including any offensive weapon/ammunition/explosive substance or weapon as defined in the Criminal Code ;

(3) Reside at your sister, Ms. Crystal Matthew’s address, […], Scarborough, Ontario from February 28 to March 3 or 4, 2013.

(4) Reside at the Ottawa Booth Centre, 171 George Street, Ottawa, Ontario commencing on March 3 or 4, 2013, or such other address as is approved by your supervisor;

(5) Attend and comply with a treatment program for substance abuse and related issues at the Ottawa Booth Centre and Anchorage Treatment program located at 171 George Street, Ottawa, Ontario;

(6) You will sign any release of medical, psychiatric or other confidential information to your doctor/counsellor in favour of your supervisor so that they can discuss your progress;

(7) Abide by all Booth Centre and Anchorage Treatment program rules;

(8) Between February 28, 2013 and March 3 or 4, 2013, obey a curfew to be in your sister, Crystal Matthew’s residence at all times, no exceptions.

(9) Obey a curfew to be in the Ottawa Booth Centre, commencing March 3 or 4, 2013, between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m., unless permission is obtained in writing from your supervisor or designate;

(10) If you are not admitted into or expelled from the Ottawa Booth Centre/Anchorage Treatment program you must attend in Newmarket Court before Justice West within one (1) week of such event; (11)You will not associate or communicate, directly or indirectly, with Renee Fisher, except through counsel, except through Family Court proceedings or pursuant to a Family Court order; and (12)You will not attend within 100 meters of any known place of residence, employment or education of Renee Fisher, except pursuant to a Family Court order. [ 42 ] Mr.

Maxwell, you will also be placed on probation for a period of three years, which will commence after the completion of the conditional sentence. During that time, you will abide by the statutory terms set out in s. 732.1(2) of the Criminal Code , namely, (

i) Keep the peace and be of good behaviour; (ii) Appear before the court when required to do so by the court; (iii) Notify the court or the probation officer in advance of any change of name or address; and (iv) Promptly notify the court or probation officer of any change of employment or occupation. [ 43 ] You will also abide by the following additional conditions: (

i) You will report to probation and thereafter as required;

(ii) You will reside at an address approved by your probation officer; (iii) You will obey a curfew to be in your place of residence between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. for the first six months of thisprobation, unless you receive written permission to be outside your residence from your probation officer; (iv) You will not associate or communicate, directly or indirectly, with Renee Fisher, except through counsel, except throughFamily Court proceedings or pursuant to a Family Court order; (

v) You will not attend within 100 meters of any known place of residence, employment or education of Renee Fisher, exceptpursuant to a Family Court order; (vi) You will abstain absolutely from the use, possession and consumption of all alcoholic beverages and non-medicallyprescribed drugs; (vii) You will attend for such assessment and/or continue such counselling for substance abuse, anger management or any otherreason as your probation officer may direct and not stop that counselling without the permission of your probation officer; (viii) Attend before me within thirty (30) days of completing your conditional sentence, for the purpose of providing information as toyour progress and thereafter as required; (ix) You will sign any release of medical, psychiatric or other confidential information to your doctor/counsellor in favour of yourprobation officer so that they can discuss your progress; (

x) You will not possess any firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, ammunition,prohibited ammunition or explosive substance, according to law; and (xi) Not to possess any weapons as defined by the Criminal Code. [44] There will be a mandatory weapons’ prohibition order, pursuant to section 109(1)(

a) of the Criminal Code, prohibitingyou from possessing any firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, ammunition, prohibitedammunition or explosive substance for life. [45] Further, I am ordering the taking of samples of bodily substances from you that are reasonably required for the purpose offorensic DNA analysis pursuant to

section 487.051(3). My understanding is that if a sample of your DNA was already taken pursuant toyour previous convictions that a further sample will not be taken. Released: February 28, 2013 Signed: “Justice Peter C. West” [1] (SCC), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688, 133 C.C.C. (3d) 385. [2] A Gladue Report was prepared for the sentencing hearing before Justice Clements on November 18, 2011, authored by Ms. LeslieKing, B.A. (Hons), LL.B., Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto. (This report was filed as Exhibit 3 in these proceedings, rather thanordering a new Gladue report.) [3] (1989) (ON CA), 48 C.C.C. (3d) 173 (Ont.

C.A.). [4] (1994), (ON CA), 29 C.R. (4th) 182 (Ont. C.A.). [5] (2004), (ON CA), 186 C.C.C. (3d) 479 (Ont. C.A.). [6] (1996), (ON CA), 105 C.C.C. (3d) 21 (Ont. C.A.). [7] (2003), (ON CA), 170 O.A.C. 282 (C.A.). [8] (1994), (ON CA), 69 O.A.C. 391 (C.A.). [9] (ON CA), [2000] O.J. No. 2558, 146 C.C.C. (3d) 321 (Ont. C.A.). [10] [2009] O.J. No. 5765 (Ont. C.J.) [11] [2010]O.J. No. 319 (Ont. C.J.). [12] 2007 ONCJ 385 , [2007] O.J. No. 3323 (Ont. C. J., Trotter, J., as he then was). [13] [2008] O.J. No. 3514 (Ont. C.J.). [14] [2009] O.J. No. 682 (Ont. S.C.J.).

[15] [2007] O.J. No. 860 (Ont. C.J.) . [16] [2008] O.J. No. 991 (Ont. C.J.) .