DATE: 20060919

DOCKET: C45490

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Appellant) – and – KELVIN SOOKDEO (Respondent)

BEFORE: GILLESE, JURIANSZ and LAFORME JJ.A.

COUNSEL:

David Lepofsky and Dan Guttman for the appellant

Steven Howarth for the respondent

HEARD & ENDORSED: September 18, 2006

On appeal from the sentence imposed by Justice Alphonse T. Lacavera of the Ontario Court of Justice on May 12, 2006.

A P P E A L B O O K E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] The respondent was convicted of four weapons offences:

Offence #1: possession of a weapon obtained by the commission of an offence;

Offence #2: weapons trafficking;

Offence #3: possession of a restricted firearm with ammunition; and

Offence #4: possession of a firearm while prohibited.

[2] He was sentenced to one year of custody in addition to pre‑trial custody of two months. The sentencing judge was misinformed in that he understood that only two of the offences attracted a minimum one‑year sentence. In fact, three of the offences attract such a minimum. Thus, to the extent that the sentencing judge imposed a 60‑day concurrent sentence for the s. 99 offence, he was in error.

[3] In any event, in our view the sentence falls markedly below the range for offences of this sort. This was a situation of multiple weapons offences. The respondent was caught with a loaded pistol concealed on his person and he had fired the gun during one attempt to sell it. These offences took place while he was subject to a weapons prohibition. The respondent was 48 years of age at the time of the offences and had a criminal record that included a conviction for uttering threats.

[4] Several recent decisions of this court have emphasized the need for sentences that reflect the gravity of weapons offences. See, for example, R. v. Jones, [2005] O.J. No. 2662 (C.A.) at para. 37. Hence our view that the sentence imposed in this case falls below the acceptable range for such offences.

[5] Accordingly, leave to appeal sentence is granted and the sentence is varied to be a total of two years less a day in addition to time served. The sentence is to be allocated as follows:

Offence #1: 1 year in addition to time served;

Offence #2: 1 year concurrent;

Offence #3: 1 year concurrent; and

Offence #4: 1 year less a day consecutive.