R. v. Davis Date:, 2011 BCPC 438

Citation: R. v. Davis Date: 20111003 2011 BCPC 0438 File No: 184170-4C Registry: Surrey IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REGINA v. RICHARD LANE DAVIS REASONS FOR SENTENCE OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE K. ARTHUR-LEUNG Counsel for the Crown: T. Buziak Counsel for the Defendant: D. Fai Place of Hearing: Surrey , B.C. Date of Hearing: October 3, 2011 Date of Judgment: October 3, 2011 [ 1 ] THE COURT : Mr. Richard Lane Davis is before me today on what was to be the first day of preliminary inquiry regarding Information 184170-4C.

He has now entered a guilty plea on that nine-count Information to Counts 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. [ 2 ] Crown and defence counsel, after careful reflection and consideration, have proposed to me a joint submission. [ 3 ] The allegations before me, to which Mr. Davis has entered a plea of guilty, are such that on August 11th, 2010, he entered a Toronto Dominion Bank located in Langley, British Columbia, approaching a teller with a bag and handing it to her and telling her "fill the bag right now".

She did so, based on her training and instructions, and he left with no firearms being produced, but he left with a bag filled with approximately $200 in cash. [ 4 ] Undaunted, Mr. Davis then entered a Westminster Savings Credit Union in British Columbia on August 18th, 2010, this time brandishing what I have been advised is an imitation firearm. The tellers, however, at the time believed it looked like a sawed-off shotgun. Mr. Davis approached the teller, asked her for money, indicated to her that he had a firearm with him. He left the Westminster Savings Credit Union with a small sum of money.

All of this was picked up on camera. [ 5 ] Thereafter, on August 20th, 2010, Mr. Davis entered an Envision Credit Union Branch located in Langley, British Columbia, again approaching the teller, or the customer service representative, asking her for money. He indicated that within his pants he was

able to produce a firearm. It was the same imitation firearm. She handed him some money and he left, not before telling her, "I'm going to start shooting something" if monies were not handed over to him. [ 6 ] On the very same day, Mr. Davis entered into another Toronto Dominion Branch located in Langley, British Columbia. No weapons or imitation weapons were seen during that time. He held his hands by or within his pants. He made a demand for money and was handed a small sum of money.

When he left the branch he was identified by civilian witnesses as he got into someone else's vehicle. [ 7 ] Thereafter, at a later date he was apprehended and placed in custody. The information that I have been given is that shortly thereafter Mr.

Davis did confess, did write, which is handed to me, a two-page handwritten letter of apology that was done voluntarily. [ 8 ] Had it not been for certain circumstances that I will articulate, I would decline to accept the joint submission as being proposed to me because at first flush it falls far short of the principles in case law which guide me and bind me. [ 9 ] Mr.

Davis has an extensive criminal record starting in 1968 in Toronto, Ontario, with break and enter with intent, and continues there on for possession of hashish, possession of narcotics, dangerous use of firearm, uttering of forged documents, mischief, assault, obstructing a peace officer, robbery with violence, three counts of break and enter and theft, theft of an auto, possession of stolen property, robbery, theft under $1,000, aggravated assault and further robbery charges, all of which have accrued since 1968 in Toronto, South Hampton, Ontario, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Kingston, Ontario, New Westminster, British Columbia and Vancouver.

The most recent entry in his criminal record is that of 2003 in Vancouver for robbery, use of an imitation firearm, robbery, in which he received consecutive sentences. [ 10 ] Troubling in this is that this offence and the dates in which he has entered pleas of guilty to me today is that they occurred while he was on parole. That is significantly troubling. Clearly Mr.

Davis did not receive the messages from previous periods of incarceration or sentencing. [ 11 ] However, in considering the following factors, that he has entered a guilty plea, I am not convinced, as Crown and defence have told me, that this is an early plea. Perhaps had this been taken to full trial in the scheme of things with judicial backlog and court backlog, it would be. The offence occurred in August 2010, the Information was sworn on October 27th, 2010, it is now October 2011. I do not take that to be significantly early, but it is early. [ 12 ] Weighing significantly in favour of Mr.

Davis is to his credit voluntarily he hand-wrote a two-page letter of apology. Now, in my short time on the bench, letters of apology come and go, and sometimes the substance of them is suspect. However, I have read it carefully and I believe in the sincerity of Mr. Davis' letter, that it was spontaneous and it was done voluntarily. What weighs significantly to the benefit of Mr.

Davis is that I have been assured by both Crown and defence that Victim Services and the peace officers involved in this matter have assured everyone that this handwritten letter of apology that is two pages, have been directed not only to the financial institutions, but for me most significantly, for the individuals who came face-to-face with Mr. Davis. Having an occupation as a bank teller or a customer service representative is something that sometimes we take for granted, and the actions that Mr.

Davis did are no doubt going to be significantly troubling for these individuals, perhaps for the rest of their lives or for a very long time. And so I am assured that this letter of apology has been personally directed to each and every one of those individuals and that bears weight to the benefit of Mr. Davis. [ 13 ] I also take into consideration the preliminary inquiry was not commenced today.

Witnesses were not required to attend this morning. [ 14 ] The eight-year consecutive joint submission is something at first flush I am loathe to accept, taking into consideration his very lengthy and extensive criminal record. If there is anyone that is a career criminal, this would be Mr. Davis. [ 15 ] In taking into consideration denunciation, deterrence, rehabilitation and case law, at first flush this is far too low to accept and should be deviated from.

However, I put significant weight on the fact that the letter of apology was written essentially immediately, and I have been assured by Crown and defence that Victim Services and the appropriate bodies have delivered this letter in a timely manner, not only to the financial institutions but also to the individuals directly impacted on those various days by Mr. Davis' actions. He has entered a relatively early plea. The preliminary inquiry did not have to commence, the witnesses were discharged from attending. [ 16 ] And regrettably for Mr.

Davis, what I also put significant weight on, is the fact that I have been advised that Mr. Davis is suffering and diagnosed from liver cancer. That is a journey no one should ever have to travel and it is regrettable that Mr. Davis has been diagnosed with such.

The diagnosis of liver cancer regrettably does not always have a significantly high successful rate in its recovery, and I have factored all of that into the foregoing [ 17 ] Based on all the foregoing, I will accept the proposal of a joint submission that there be an eight-year consecutive sentence on Counts 1, 3, 5 and 7, that being the robbery allegations to which he has entered a plea of guilty. [ 18 ] There will be a global sentence on Counts 1, 3, 5 and 7 of six years, and on Counts 4 and 6 I will impose for each count the mandatory one year, all such terms to be served consecutively, thus making it an eight-year term. [ 19 ] I have been assured by counsel that given the lengthy record of Mr.

Davis, there already has been once, if not more, of a DNA order in place, and therefore I will not make a DNA order. [ 20 ] Taking into consideration the life sentence for his health that Mr. Davis is now sadly grappling with, I do not see the need to impose a firearms prohibition at this time. [ 21 ] Thank you. [ 22 ] MR. BUZIAK: The Crown will direct stays, Your Honour, on Counts 2, 8 and 9.

[ 23 ] THE COURT: Thank you. [ 24 ] MR. FAI: And the victim fine surcharge? [ 25 ] THE COURT: Waived. [ 26 ] MR. FAI: Thank you. (REASONS FOR SENTENCE CONCLUDED)