DATE: 20010912
DOCKET: C32192
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
RE:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) - and - JOSE COELHO (Appellant)
BEFORE:
DOHERTY, ROSENBERG AND MOLDAVER JJ.A.
COUNSEL:
Keith E. Wright
For the appellant
Gregory J. Tweney
For the respondent
HEARD:
July 11, 2001
E N D O R S E M E N T
Sentence
1On July 13, 2001 we released written reasons dismissing the appellant's appeal from conviction for the offence of attempted murder and substituting a conviction for the lesser included offence of aggravated assault. In view of that disposition, we invited counsel to file written submissions on the issue of sentence.
2Having received and reviewed those submissions, we believe that a fit sentence for the offence of aggravated assault is one of twenty months imprisonment from the release date of these reasons. Ordinarily, we would have imposed a custodial sentence of two years less one day. The reduction is based on the fact that the appellant has been in custody for about two months pending the final disposition of this appeal and we think, in the circumstances, that he should be credited on a two for one basis for that period of time
3In arriving at the sentence of twenty months, we have taken into account the appellant's background and character, his present state of health and the facts and circumstances surrounding the offence. Those considerations cause us to reject the Crown's submission that the three-year penitentiary term, imposed by the trial judge for the offence of attempted murder, should be sustained.
4By the same token, we do not accept the appellant's submission that he should receive a conditional sentence in the range of twelve to eighteen months. In our view, a conditional sentence is inappropriate because it fails to adequately reflect the principles of denunciation and general deterrence which we consider to be paramount in the circumstances.
5This was an extremely serious offence with grave consequences. The appellant had no good reason to leave his home and pursue the victim and his friends and his conduct in driving at the victim while travelling the wrong way on a one-way street at a high rate of speed can only be described as deliberate and purposeful. Tragically, but not unexpectedly, it resulted in severe and lasting physical injuries and psychological harm to the victim. The appellant's level of moral blameworthiness is heightened by his flight from the scene. In the circumstances, the need for denunciation and deterrence is pressing and we think a traditional sentence of incarceration is required.
6Accordingly, the appellant is sentenced for the offence of aggravated assault to a term of twenty months imprisonment commencing on the release date of these reasons.