COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
RE:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) – and – CARLISS VICTORIA FLETCHER-JARVIS (Appellant)
BEFORE:
MOLDAVER, BLAIR and LaFORME JJ.A.
COUNSEL:
Mangesh Duggal
for the appellant
Susan Ficek
for the respondent
HEARD & ENDORSED:
January 28, 2005
On appeal from sentence imposed by Justice Nancy S. Kastner of the Ontario Court of Justice dated July 21, 2004.
A P P E A L B O O K E N D O R S E M E N T
1We are not persuaded that the sentence imposed by the trial judge exceeded the range suggested by Crown counsel. In any event, having regard to the gravity and seriousness of the crime (aggravated assault) and the appellant’s lengthy record for crimes of violence, we are satisfied that the sentence imposed by the trial judge was fit. In so concluding, we note that the trial judge quite properly observed that the case could well have attracted a penitentiary sentence. However, having regard to the appellant’s remorse and most importantly, the efforts she has made to rid herself of her drug and alcohol problems, the trial judge determined that a reformatory sentence with three years probation would recognize those efforts without sacrificing the overriding principles of denunciation and general and specific deterrence.
2In all of the circumstances, we think that the sentence imposed was fair and balanced and if anything, at the low end of the range.
3Like the trial judge, we too are hopeful that the appellant will take the steps needed to overcome her drug abuse problems and that she will go on to become a responsible member of society. While we have taken her efforts into account, they do not alter our belief that the sentence under review is fit.
4Accordingly, while we would grant leave to appeal, we would dismiss the appeal against sentence.