R. v. Seed Date:, 2015 BCPC 178

Citation: R. v. Seed Date: 20150407 2015 BCPC 0178 File No: 202892-1K Registry: Surrey IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REGINA v. RONALD CHARLES JOSEPH SEED ORAL REASONS FOR SENTENCE OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE D. R. GARDNER Counsel for the Crown: P. Beirne Counsel for the Defendant: D. Melville Place of Hearing: Surrey , B.C. Dates of Hearing: January 8, 9, 2015 Date of Judgment: April 7, 2015

[ 1 ] THE COURT : Mr. Seed has been found guilty, after a trial, of assault with a weapon against Danny Amaro, that weapon being a knife, and Count 3 as well, assault upon Danny Amaro causing bodily harm. [ 2 ] I will briefly summarize my Reasons for Judgment which I gave in January. In the early morning hours, Mr. Amaro and Mr. Seed's ex-girlfriend, who had met earlier that evening at a nightclub, were sleeping in the same bed. There is no dispute that they had engaged in consensual sex on that occasion. In the early morning hours Mr.

Seed, who had been attempting to contact Lisa Hawkins earlier that evening without her responding, began pounding on the doors and the windows of her apartment. Apparently he has done this before. Ms. Hawkins was not particularly alarmed, but Mr. Amaro suggested they call the police and she said, "No, don't do that." She urged Mr. Amaro to stay, but a few minutes after that she finally let Mr. Seed into the apartment. [ 3 ] Mr. Seed then walked into the bedroom where Mr.

Amaro was dressed only in boxer shorts, turned the light on, left briefly, and returned carrying a butcher knife in one hand and a chef's knife in the other. He stormed into the room and told Mr. Amaro to leave. Mr. Amaro obviously was somewhat startled at this time of day by this scenario, and he also told Mr. Amaro to "get the fuck out of there". Mr. Amaro urged the accused to calm down, but Mr. Seed told Amaro he was not afraid to stab him and he was not afraid of going to jail. Lisa Hawkins asked Mr.

Seed, "Why are you doing this?" that they were no longer dating, and he responded, "You need to get him out of here." He told Amaro again to "get the fuck out of there". The accused then pressed his knife up against Mr. Amaro's neck and told him he was going to cut him up if he did not leave. [ 4 ] Lisa Hawkins tried to get between them but she was pushed to the bed by Mr. Seed. He then punched Amaro in the orbital bone. Mr. Amaro was telling Mr. Seed that he should leave but the accused said once again that he would cut him. He then pushed the knife slightly into the victim's chest.

Amaro tried to protect Lisa but he was punched once again in the facial area, and finally Mr. Amaro said words to the effect, "If you wanna fight, I'll fight you, but you'll have to put the knives down first." This only made Mr. Seed become more aggressive. He lunged twice at Mr. Amaro with the knives, he did not contact him, obviously, but Amaro, understandably, decided to leave, and as he did so he was sucker-punched in the back of the head. Mr.

Amaro's injuries included the loss of his front tooth. [ 5 ] He then, after he left the apartment, called the police. [ 6 ] At trial the accused took the positon that this was simply a consensual fight and he entered the apartment because he was concerned for Lisa Hawkins' safety, a position that was rejected by the court. [ 7 ] The court has received a pre-sentence report at the request of defence counsel, and the position of the defence is that an appropriate sentence would be a conditional sentence of two years.

The Crown has asked the court to impose a period of incarceration of at least one year. [ 8 ] The aggravating factors here are that Mr. Amaro had every right to be in that apartment and the accused had absolutely no right to charge into the bedroom and engage in such aggressive and assaultive activity under the pretence that he was concerned for Ms. Hawkins' safety. Obviously he came over that night, uninvited, and was pounding on the windows and determined to enter the residence because his actions were solely motivated by jealousy and anger. [ 9 ] The accused has had an unfortunate background.

His biological parents were certainly lacking in parenting skills and that is obviously reflected in the pre-sentence report. He has had difficulty holding a job for a long period of time. Obviously some of his periods of employment have been interrupted by his criminal record. He has, as the Crown has pointed out, a previous conviction for breaking and entering in Winnipeg in 2002, a conviction for robbery in 2003 for which he received four months secure custody, in 2005 in Winnipeg assault with a weapon, received a suspended sentence.

In 2006 he was convicted of robbery with violence and received a total sentence of 13 months, and in 2008 he was convicted of uttering threats. [ 10 ] In considering whether or not a conditional sentence is appropriate, I have to be satisfied, as set out in the principles in R. v. Proulx , a Supreme Court of Canada case decided in 2000 where objectives such as denunciation and deterrence are particularly pressing, incarceration will generally be the preferable sanction.

There are a number of other tests set out, and I recognize that a period of custody should only be imposed when no other sentence is appropriate. [ 11 ] The circumstances here are quite aggravated, in my view; he had absolutely no lawful right to demand that Mr. Amaro leave the apartment, and he is the one who chose to escalate it in this fashion, causing a significant injury to Mr.

Amaro as set out in the pre- sentence report. [ 12 ] Accordingly, in considering the facts of this case, the background of the accused, the submissions of counsel and the relevant case law, and I should point out that the two cases that have been provided by the accused are distinguishable on the fact that the accused in one case had no record, and with the other accused in Judge Walker's case, the case of R. v.

Louie , the assault on the bus driver, his record was substantially less than the accused's before me today. [ 13 ] Yes, the accused has "successfully" completed conditional sentences in the past, but on the other hand, they do not seem to have dissuaded him from engaging in further criminal activity. [ 14 ] Accordingly, I have concluded that a fit and proper sentence on Count 1 is 18 months' imprisonment; on Count 3 it will be 12 months, concurrent. [ 15 ] I am not going to place him on supervised probation. That has been tried a number of times in the past without success.

It will be unsupervised probation for a period of two years, the conditions are simply keep the peace and be of good behaviour, and he shall have no contact, directly or indirectly, with Danny Amaro. [ 16 ] Moreover, you shall not possess any weapons as defined in s. 2 of the Criminal Code ; moreover, you shall not possess any

firearms, ammunition or explosive substances. [ 17 ] I am going to order a DNA sample be taken. I am almost certain it has been taken before. They will not take it twice, but in case I am wrong on that I am ordering a DNA sample be taken. [ 18 ] THE CLERK: And just to clarify, that's DNA secondary on Count 1 or 2? [ 19 ] THE COURT: The probation will be on both counts. [ 20 ] MR. BEIRNE: And that would be Count 1. [ 21 ] THE CLERK: Count 1, the DNA secondary? Thank you. [ 22 ] THE COURT: Thank you, counsel. [ 23 ] THE CLERK: Oh, and sorry, Your Honour, the victim fine surcharge? [ 24 ] THE COURT: Payable forthwith, in default one day concurrent. (REASONS FOR SENTENCE CONCLUDED)