DATE: 20010529
DOCKETS: C27509 and C27646
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
McMURTRY C.J.O., FINLAYSON and LABROSSE JJ.A.
B E T W E E N:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Feroza Bhabha, for the respondent
Respondent
- and -
JOHN WANG
Frank Addario and Andras Schreck,
for the appellant
Appellant
A N D B E T W E E N :
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
- and -
NORMAN SIU KEE LO
Appellant
Feroza Bhabha, for the respondent
Matthew T. McGarvey, for the appellant
Heard: March 21 and 22, 2001
S U P P L E M E N T A R Y R E A S O N S
FINLAYSON J.A.:
[1] These reasons supplement my reasons of April 23, 2001 relating to the appellant Wang in which I invited counsel to suggest appropriate adjustments in the specific counts of the indictment on which this appellant was convicted in order to reduce the totality of the sentences to five years imprisonment. I am indebted to counsel for their agreement on this matter. The following is based on that agreement.
[2] The trial judge broke down the sentences in the following way. The counts that are subject to a minimum consecutive sentence are marked with two asterisks.
Robbery 3 years concurrent
Robbery 3 years concurrent
Unlawful confinement 3 years concurrent
Unlawful confinement 3 years concurrent
Robbery 2 years consecutive
Unlawful confinement 2 years concurrent
Threaten death 2 years concurrent
Use firearm 1 year consecutive**
Threaten death 3 years concurrent
Use firearm 1 year consecutive**
Robbery 2 years consecutive
Unlawful confinement 2 years concurrent
Threaten death 2 years concurrent
Robbery 2 years concurrent
Unlawful confinement 2 years concurrent
Unlawful confinement 2 years concurrent
Use firearm 1 year consecutive**
Counts 5 and 6 related only to the appellant Lo.
[3] At the time these offences were committed in 1995, s. 344 of the Criminal Code did not include a four-year minimum for robbery with a firearm and s. 85(1)(a) (the section under which the appellant was charged) applied to all indictable offences (the section now excludes a number of offences, including robbery).
[4] The appellant was convicted on three counts under s. 85(1)(a) of the Code, and the court must accordingly impose three one-year sentences that must be consecutive to each other and any other sentence he receives. Accordingly, to obtain the five-year sentence the court wishes to impose, the appellant should be sentenced to two years concurrent on each count, except for the counts under s. 85(1)(a). The breakdown is as follows:
Robbery 2 years concurrent
Robbery 2 years concurrent
Unlawful confinement 2 years concurrent
Unlawful confinement 2 years concurrent
Robbery 2 years concurrent
Unlawful confinement 2 years concurrent
Threaten death 2 years concurrent
Use firearm 1 year consecutive**
Threaten death 2 years concurrent
Use firearm 1 year consecutive**
Robbery 2 years concurrent
Unlawful confinement 2 years concurrent
Threaten death 2 years concurrent
Robbery 2 years concurrent
Unlawful confinement 2 years concurrent
Unlawful confinement 2 years concurrent
Use firearm 1 year consecutive**
[5] The totality of the sentences is five years. Accordingly, the individual sentences should be varied to reflect the above disposition.
Released: MAY 29 2001 Signed: “G.D. Finlayson J.A.”
RRM “I agree R.R. McMurtry C.J.O.”
“I agree J.-M. Labrosse J.A.”