R. v. Ekpakohak, 2020 NUCJ 31

Nunavunmi Maligaliuqtiit NUNAVUT COURT OF JUSTICE Cour de justice du Nunavut Citation: R. v. Ekpakohak, 2020 NUCJ 31 Date: 20200805 Docket: 21-20-34 Registry: Iqaluit Crown: Her Majesty the Queen -and- Accused: Douglas Ekpakohak ________________________________________________________________________ Before: Mr. Chief Justice Sharkey Counsel (Crown): J. Tremblay Counsel (Accused): W. McDiarmid Location Heard: Iqaluit, Nunavut Date Heard: July 31, 2020 Matters: Sentencing for assault and breach of probation under the Criminal Code of Canada , RSC 1985, c C-46 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT (NOTE: This document may have been edited for publication)

I. INTRODUCTION [ 1 ] This case is the companion case to R v Pangon , 2020 NUCJ 30 . My reasons in this decision echo those in Pangon , and my general comments in Pangon regarding sentencing in the age of COVID-19 apply to Mr. Ekpakohak as well. I will set out Mr. Ekpakohak’s specific circumstances here. II. THE OFFENDER AND THE CHARGE [ 2 ] On 5 August 2020, I sentenced two Inuit male offenders, Mr. Ekpakohak and Mr. Pangon, to periods of imprisonment for offences committed against their respective female partners as well as offences relating to breaches of court orders. [ 3 ] Mr.

Ekpakohak (35 years old) pleaded guilty to one charge of assault with a weapon (for throwing a large ceramic ashtray at his spouse which caused a bruise to her head), and one charge of breaching a probation order. He has a record of previous spousal assaults for which he has served time in custody. [ 4 ] He was in custody and being held at the Rankin Inlet Healing Center (RIHC) when he came before me (via telephone) on 5 August 2020. I was told by counsel that should I impose further periods of imprisonment, that Mr. Ekpakohak would serve any such additional jail time at the RIHC. [ 5 ] Mr.

Ekpakohak spent 104 days in remand. He was required to spend the first 14 days of his time in remand in COVID-19 isolation quarantine, during which time he was isolated alone in the medical unit, with a short amount of time each day to shower and use the telephone. He was not permitted, however, to socialize with other inmates, and did not have access to any rehabilitative programming. Mr.

Ekpakohok completed this quarantine at the Baffin Correctional Center and was then immediately transferred to RIHC, where access to full programming for all inmates had been restored by the time he arrived. [ 6 ] Upon completion of his quarantine Mr. Ekpakohak joined the general population, and by the time of his court appearance had been taking counselling and attending AA meetings. He had also taken a sewing class, and according to his lawyer had become accomplished to the point where he planned to continue this activity commercially after he served his sentence. [ 7 ] Mr.

Ekpakohak does not have any health conditions or personal factors which would indicate a heightened risk should he contract COVID-19. III. THE SENTENCE IMPOSED [ 8 ] The Crown suggested a term of 180 days in jail for the charge of assault with a weapon and a term of 60 days in jail for the breach of probation to be served consecutively, for a total custodial sentence of 240 days. [ 9 ] Defence counsel agreed with the Crown position respecting the jail terms to be imposed for each offence, but suggested that there were compelling Gladue factors in Mr.

Ekpakohak’s background which should allow the two sentences to run together and be served concurrently for a sentence of 180 days jail.

[ 10 ] I agreed with the Defence position and sentenced Mr. Ekpakohak to 180 days jail. I then deducted from this 180 days the time Mr. Ekpakohak spent on remand. As noted, above, Mr. Ekpakohak spent 104 days in custody on remand. [ 11 ] I granted him enhanced credit at 1.5 to 1: accordingly, I calculated his remand credit to be 156 days (104 days at 1.5 to 1). Thus, the net sentence moving forward that Mr. Ekpakohak would be required to actually serve in jail was 24 days. [ 12 ] This sentence will be followed by an 18 month period of probation which includes restrictions on Mr.

Ekpakohak’s contact with his spouse, as well as a requirement that he participate in counselling programs as directed by his probation officer. Dated at the City of Iqaluit this 5th day of August, 2020 ___________________ Justice N. Sharkey Nunavut Court of Justice