COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) v. J. B. (a young person)
(Appellant/Applicant)
BEFORE: OSBORNE A.C.J.O., LASKIN and CHARRON JJ.A.
COUNSEL: Edmund L. Schofield, for the appellant
Howard Liebovich, for the respondent
HEARD: August 30, 2000
On appeal from his conviction by the Honourable Mr. Justice Minoo F. Khoorshed on September 14, 1998.
E N D O R S E M E N T
1We did not call on the Crown on the conviction appeal. The trial judge’s finding that the appellant spoke to a lawyer before giving his statement was supported not just by the evidence of Officer Young but also by the evidence of two other police officers. Moreover, the appellant did not testify on the voir dire. As this was the only ground of appeal advanced against conviction, the conviction appeal is dismissed.
2The circumstances of this offence and the appellant’s conduct and attitude afterward merited a severe sentence. However, the appellant has already served nearly a year in secure custody, including three months’ pre-trial detention. He has been out on bail for over a year and the fresh evidence shows that he is continuing to attend school and is doing well. In these circumstances we do not think that reincarcerating him would be appropriate. Instead, we vary the sentence to time served but in addition order the appellant to be on probation for one year. The terms of the probation order shall be paragraphs 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13 of the bail order of Moldaver J.A. dated April 27, 2000. Paragraph 7 shall require the appellant to report forthwith on release to the Old City Hall, 60 Queen Street West, and afterwards as required.
Signed: “C.A. Osborne A.C.J.O.”
“John Laskin J.A.”
“Louise Charron J.A.”