Court of Appeal for Ontario
Rosenberg, Sharpe & Gillese JJ.A.
Between
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
and
Pedro Simoes
Applicant / Appellant
Counsel:
Kristin Bailey, for the appellant
Gregory J. Tweney and Michael Perlin for the respondent
Heard: June 21, 2013
On appeal from the sentence imposed on January 25, 2012 by Justice C. William Hourigan of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting without a jury.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
1We do not find it necessary to address Ms. Bailey’s interesting argument about the constitutionality of s.5 of the Truth in Sentencing Act and the application of s.11(i) of the Charter.
2This issue was not raised at trial. However, the parties agree to credit the appellant with an additional 315 days credit, which had already been taken into account in another unrelated sentencing. The result is that, in effect, the appellant actually did receive the equivalent of 2:1 credit for 315 of the 387 days for which double credit is now sought.
3The resulting sentence imposed was not only fit but at the low end of the range given the number of aggravating factors: the lengthy record for similar offences; the danger the appellant represented because of his commitment to the criminal lifestyle and the seriousness of the offences which involved considerable planning and sophistication and the theft of vehicles worth almost $150,000.
4Accordingly, while leave to appeal is granted the appeal is dismissed.
