R. v. D.(R.), 2013 ONCJ 487
Opinion
Citation: R. v. D.(R.) , 2013 ONCJ 487 ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN v. R.D. REASONS FOR SENTENCE AS GIVEN BY THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A. HARRIS on April 17, 2013, at CAYUGA, Ontario INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROHIBITED FROM PUBLICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 486.4(1) OF THE CRIMINAL CODE BY ORDER OF THE COURT DATED NOVEMBER 23, 2010 APPEARANCES : A. Paparella Counsel for the Crown R.D. In Person
ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE TABLE OF CONTENTS HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN v. R.D. INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROHIBITED FROM PUBLICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 486.4(1) OF THE CRIMINAL CODE BY ORDER OF THE COURT DATED NOVEMBER 23, 2010 Transcript Ordered May 7, 2013 Transcript Completed June 12, 2013 Ordering Party Notified June 12, 2013 INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROHIBITED FROM PUBLICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 486.4(1) OF THE CRIMINAL CODE BY ORDER OF THE COURT DATED NOVEMBER 23, 2010 REASONS FOR SENTENCE HARRIS, J. (Orally ): Just so that everything is clear on the record, Mr. D. was convicted before me of sexual assault, sexual interference, and invitation to sexual touching. I will point out that the statement in paragraph 1 of the application is incorrect in that it indicates convictions on two counts of sexual assault. There was a finding of guilty with respect to two counts of sexual assault, but with the concurrence of the Crown there was a conditional stay entered with respect to the one count. Mr.
D. was sentenced by me on March 27, March 27, 2013 with respect to all three counts. At that time a joint submission was placed before me. One part of the joint submission was that an ancillary order pursuant to the Sexual Offender Information Registration Act be made and that it be for a period of 10 years.
A review of all of the Criminal Code provisions makes it clear that when an individual has been convicted of more than one enumerated offence, the appropriate time for which he should be required to comply with the Sexual Offender Information Registration Act is, in fact, for life. All of the above is beyond dispute. The only issue that might be put before me would be the question of whether I am functus . As I understand it, Crown counsel was in a position to present the court with a number of prior decisions that indicate that I am not functus . This is not a matter of my imposing a new or further sentence.
This is simply a matter of correcting an obvious mistake on an ancillary order and I have retained jurisdiction to do so for a period of some 90 days following the imposition of the sentence. MS. PAPARELLA: Yes, Your Honour. THE COURT: If I understand what is being said to me this morning, Mr. Kerr, as counsel for Mr. D., agrees that this is the case and that I retain jurisdiction to correct the error that I made in my earlier order for a period of 90 days following the making of said error. MS. PAPARELLA: That, that is correct, Your Honour.
I read from a letter dated April 16 th , 2013 that was faxed to my office, and I can provide it to Your Honour if you’d like it to be attached to the form 1 application. THE COURT: It might be an idea to have that attached. Now, Mr. D., you have had a chance to speak with Mr. Kerr? R.D.: Yes. THE COURT: And is the position taken by Mr. Kerr then the correct one that is being taken on your behalf? R.D.: Yes. THE COURT: You are agreeing with that? R.D.: Yes. THE COURT: Albeit reluctantly. So as I said, I have since had an opportunity to review all of the relevant sections of the Criminal Code .
They do make it clear that it was an error when I ordered that the Act be complied with only for a period of 10 years. In the circumstances, that order will be amended to indicate that Mr. D. is ordered to comply with the Sex Offender Information Registration Act for the rest of his life. Thank you, counsel. Thank you Mr. D. ...DISCUSSION REGARDING UNRELATED MATTER NOT REQUIRED FORM 2 Certificate of Transcript Evidence Act, Subsection 5(2) I, J.H. Fleet certify that this document is a true and accurate transcription of the recording of R. v.
R.D. in the Ontario Court of Justice held at 55 Munsee Street North, Cayuga, Ontario, taken from Recording No. 1111-3-20130123-51, which has been certified in Form 1.
June 12, 2013 ________________________________ (Date) (Signature of authorized person) This certification does not apply to the Reasons for Sentence, which were judicially edited.
Loading document…