CITATION: R. v. Farouk, 2009 ONCA 217

DATE: 20090311

DOCKET: C46303

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

Moldaver, Gillese and Armstrong JJ.A.

BETWEEN:

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

and

Michael Farouk

Appellant

Mark Halfyard, for the appellant

Kim Crosbie, for the respondent

Heard and endorsed: March 10, 2009

On appeal from sentence imposed by Justice Terrance O’Connor of the Superior Court of Justice dated October 18, 2005.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] We are not persuaded that the trial judge made any errors in his analysis or disposition. The appellant’s crimes – sexual assault with a weapon, robbery and threatening death in relation to a vulnerable victim – are to say the least, extremely serious. Several months after committing these crimes, the appellant, while on bail, committed similar crimes on another victim, albeit that the offence of sexual assault was found not to have involved a weapon.

[2] A psychiatric analysis performed on the appellant shows that the appellant has a “coercive, non-consenting sexual preference”, also known as a “rape preference” and that such a preference is typically considered to be lifelong. This psychiatrist also felt that the appellant’s risk for “recidism in a sexually violent way” was moderate to high.

[3] In short, at the time of sentencing, the appellant represented a serious risk to society and the trial judge was correct in treating the protection of society as the overriding sentencing consideration. In these circumstances, the 7 ½ years global sentence for the three offences was in our view appropriate.

[4] Accordingly, while leave to appeal sentence is granted, the appeal is dismissed.