R. v. VANCE Date:, 2017 BCPC 50

Citation: R. v. VANCE Date: 20170227 2017 BCPC 50 File No: 49949-2-C Registry: Vernon IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REGINA v. LORI VICTORIA VANCE REASONS FOR SENTENCE OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE R. HEWSON Counsel for the Crown: Iain Currie Counsel for the Defendant: Wade Jenson Place of Hearing: Vernon , B.C. Date of Hearing: February 27, 2017 Date of Judgment: February 27, 2017

Introduction [ 1 ] There are some kinds of tragedies to which I, as a Judge, am ill-equipped to respond. There is nothing I can do here today that will in any way be proportionate to the loss experienced by the Smith family, or that will restore Ms. Hauck to the good health she enjoyed before October 2014. There is nothing I can do that will be experienced by Ms.

Vance as a punishment nearly as great as the guilt she must bear for the rest for life. [ 2 ] Victoria Vance has plead guilty to operating a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol, and thereby causing the death of Erin Smith, and causing bodily harm to Lindsey Hauck. [ 3 ] The Crown is seeking a sentence at the high end of the range of 2 to 4 years. [ 4 ] The defence is seeking a sentence of two years less one day, to be followed by three years’ probation. [ 5 ] Today, I am called upon to determine, according to the law, what will be a fit sentence. In R. v.

Smith, [2013] BCJ No. 713 (BCCA) , the Court said this at para 39: 39 The imposition of a fit sentence accomplishes a number of things: it holds the offender responsible for his or her actions; it demonstrates to society as a whole that this member of society cannot commit crimes without facing consequences; it acknowledges the harm done to the victim; it contributes to the protection of the public by either (

a) rehabilitating the offender or (b), through incapacitation; punishing the offender; and it reminds the offender that unlawful conduct has consequences. [ 6 ] I will start by reviewing the circumstances of the offender, before turning to the details of the incident and the aftermath. I will review, briefly, the sentencing law that applies to cases like this, and what I find to be the aggravating and mitigating factors in this case. Then I will pass sentence on Ms. Vance. Circumstances of the Offender [ 7 ] Victoria Vance is 39 years old. She is the mother of four children, ranging in age from 6 to 18 years old.

She is separated from her husband, the father of her two youngest children, and at the time of sentencing all four children live with her. [ 8 ] Ms. Vance was born in Ontario and came to British Columbia with her mother at the age of seven. She graduated from high school, and has been gainfully employed at almost all times since then. She has worked in retail stores, as a bookkeeper, and as an administrator at a driving school. In addition, she has trained as a legal assistant. She has frequently been her family’s sole source of income. [ 9 ] Ms. Vance filed a book of 15 character letters.

The letters describe her as a caring and responsible friend, and refer to her altruism, empathy and devotion to her children. The letter writers all relate that Ms. Vance is intensely remorseful. [ 10 ] She has no criminal record, and no driving record. Circumstances of the Offence [ 11 ] On the evening of October 22, 2014, Ms. Vance and a friend met at the Village Green Hotel in Vernon. Over the course of the evening, Ms. Vance consumed about 6 pints of Guinness and six tequila shooters. She left the bar sometime between midnight and 1:00 a.m. on October 23, 2014.

When she left, the lady that had been serving her asked if she would be driving. Ms. Vance told the server she would be getting a ride home. For some reason, she decided to drive home herself. That fateful decision set in chain a series of events that resulted in the death of Erin Smith and the serious injuries suffered by Lindsey Hauck. [ 12 ] Erin Smith and Lindsey Hauck were working together as nurses at the Vernon Jubilee Hospital on October 23, 2014. Shortly after midnight, they took their break together. They left the hospital in Ms. Smith’s car and drove north on 32 nd St., towards Tim Horton’s.

The two friends were going to have a coffee together. Ms. Smith was driving, and Ms. Hauck was in the passenger seat. They were traveling at or below the posted speed limit. They crossed the intersection of 32 nd St. and 30 th Ave. on a green light. [ 13 ] As Ms. Smith and Ms. Hauck entered the intersection, Ms. Vance was traveling east on 30 th Ave. The traffic light was red. Ms. Vance was traveling at a speed of between 74 and 98 km/h, well in excess of the posted speed limit. There was no sign that either driver applied the brakes. Ms. Vance’s vehicle struck the vehicle being driven by Ms.

Smith with so much force that Ms. Smith’s vehicle was driven about 30 m sideways. [ 14 ] The first witness on the scene, Tracy Thompson, ran to Ms. Smith’s vehicle. She found Ms. Smith conscious, with blood on her face. Ms. Smith died before she reached hospital. [ 15 ] Ms. Hauck was badly injured. She suffered a skull fracture, abdominal injuries and a broken arm. She went through two surgeries and was not discharged from the hospital for two weeks. She suffers from the effects of her injuries to this day. [ 16 ] The police responded quickly. Ms. Vance told the police that she was driving.

She had an odour of alcohol on her breath. She failed an approved screening device test, and was transported to the hospital by the police. Blood samples were taken at the hospital, and breath samples were taken later at the police detachment. While the passage of time and intervening events make the results of the tests imprecise, it is safe to say that Ms. Vance’s blood-alcohol concentration at the time of the collision was in excess of 200 mg of alcohol in 100 mL of blood. [ 17 ] Ms. Vance was charged, and elected trial in Supreme Court. A preliminary inquiry was scheduled at the start of 2016. Shortly

before the Preliminary Inquiry, she gave notice of her intent to consent to committal for trial. The Supreme Court trial was scheduled totake place a few weeks from now. At the end of 2016, Ms. Vance advised the Crown that she intended to re-elect, and would proceed tosentencing in this court. Victim Impact Statement [18] The Crown filed five Victim Impact Statements, including the Impact Statement of Lindsey Hauck and the Impact Statement ofBrian and Michelle Smith, the parents of Erin Smith.

Taken together, these statements describe more eloquently than I ever could theterrible aftermath and the losses suffered by all involved. [19] Mr. Smith addressed the court. He said, “For our daughter Erin, there exists no action that could provide redress for herpersonally under our civil justice system and the fact that someone might be punished under the criminal justice system for causing herdeath is meaningless to her. She is dead.” He went on later to say, “In the case of Michelle and I, we try not to feel sorry for ourselves.

However to carry on with our lives absent the meaning they once held is difficult, and at times it seems almost impossible. The hurt,the pain, the grief still lingers, it is pervasive, and affects everything we do.” [20] Ms. Vance addressed the court. At her request, I permitted her to turn so that she could face the gallery and express her regretdirectly to the families and friends of Ms. Hauck and Ms. Smith. Her remorse was evident, and deeply felt. Objectives of Sentencing [21] The primary sentencing objectives in a case like this are denunciation and deterrence.

Rehabilitation is an important, butsecondary objective. Let me explain what I mean by those terms. o Denunciation. This is a statement of our community’s condemnation of conduct, like impaired driving, that has encroached on ourbasic code of values and, for that reason, should be punished. o General Deterrence. This is an attempt to discourage other potential offenders, and to educate the general public, about thepotentially deadly consequences of impaired driving. o Specific Deterrence.

This is an attempt to discourage this offender from committing offences in the future, through the fear of furtherpunishment. o Rehabilitation. This can be the best protection society has, and is usually the main objective for youthful offenders. However, it willnormally not be the primary objective in cases like this. Other Sentencing Principles [22] There are also principles of sentencing I must apply, including proportionality, totality and parity. Let me also explain what Imean by those terms. o Proportionality.

The sentence I impose must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of theoffender. o Totality. The offender should not be punished by combined sentences that are unduly long or harsh. o Parity. The sentence imposed on this offender should be similar to the sentences imposed on similar offenders in similarcircumstances. However, parity of sentence is secondary to a fit sentence and a uniform approach to sentencing. Case Precedents [23] The sentences imposed on similar offenders in similar circumstances are instructive. [24] In R. v.

Smith, supra, the Court of Appeal said that the range of sentence for impaired driving causing death is 18 months at thelow-end, and eight years at the high end. Within that range, the specific circumstances of the offender, and the circumstances of theoffence before the court will, considered together, lead to a particular sentence. [25] In R. v. Smith, the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal from a sentence of one day incarceration followed by three years’probation, and substituted a sentence of two years less one day incarceration followed by probation. Ms.

Smith drove an automobilewhile impaired by drugs and alcohol. She struck and killed a motorcyclist. She entered a rehabilitation program, and at the time ofsentencing she had been sober for 15 months. [26] In R. v. Berner, 2013 BCCA 188, the Court of Appeal upheld the sentence of 2½ years imposed following a trial. Ms. Bernerwas 58 years old, and had no criminal record. While impaired by alcohol and driving at an excessive speed, she lost control of her car. She struck a parked vehicle, and then veered off and struck a four-year-old child and her aunt.

The child was killed and the auntsuffered serious injuries. [27] In R. v. Warren, 2012 BCPC 483 , 2012 BCPC 0483, the Honourable Associate Chief Judge Gill imposed a sentenceof two years and 10 months for dangerous and impaired driving causing death. Ms. Warren, the offender, was driving with a bloodalcohol concentration of 140 mg of alcohol in 100 mL of blood and at excessive speed when she drove through a red light and collidedwith a vehicle being driven by another young woman. Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances [28] With those cases as a backdrop, I will turn to the sentencing factors in this case.

A sentence should be increased or reduced to

account for any relevant aggravating or mitigating circumstances relating to the offence or the offender. [ 29 ] In this case, there are four particularly aggravating factors. They are: 1. Ms. Vance’s decision to drive in spite of her obvious intoxication and the suggestion of a server that she get a ride home. 2. Her speed, which was well in excess of the posted speed limit. 3. Her failure to see the red light controlling traffic at the intersection. 4. Her high level of intoxication. [ 30 ] There are also mitigating factors. They include: 1. Her obvious remorse. 2.

Her obligations for her family, particularly her two youngest children. 3. The absence of any record of criminal convictions or Motor Vehicle Act offences. [ 31 ] I can give far less weight to her guilty plea as mitigating factor, coming as it did over two years after the offence was committed. Sentence [ 32 ] Ms. Vance, will you please stand? [ 33 ] I will begin with the ancillary order. [ 34 ] Pursuant to

section 259 of the Criminal Code , you are prohibited from operating any motor vehicle on any street, road, highway or other public place in Canada for six years. [ 35 ] Pursuant to

section 737 of the Criminal Code , you must pay a victim surcharge in the amount of $400 to the clerk of the court within two months following the expiry of the warrant of committal, or within two years, whichever is earlier. [ 36 ] Both impaired driving causing death, and impaired driving causing bodily harm are secondary offences, and I order you to attend within the correctional center in which you are held by Friday, March 10, 2017 at 3:00 p.m. and thereafter as may be necessary in order for a sample or samples of your bodily substances to be taken for purposes of registration in the national DNA databank, in accordance with the provisions of

Part XV of the Criminal Code . This order is valid until executed. [ 37 ] Finally, I find that a fit sentence for the crime of impaired driving causing the death of Erin Smith will be incarceration for a term of three years, and the sentence for the crime of impaired driving causing bodily harm to Lindsey Hauck will be a sentence of one year, to be served concurrently. The Honourable Judge R. Hewson Provincial Court of British Columbia