Court File and Parties

Citation: R. v. Demarco, 2011 ONCA 832

Date: 20111222

Docket: C51237 C51397 C51356

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Doherty, Rosenberg and Lang JJ.A.

Between

Her Majesty The Queen

Respondent

and

Paul Demarco

Appellant

Counsel:

Theodore Sarantis, for the appellant

Kimberley Crosbie, for the respondent

Heard and endorsed: December 22, 2011

On appeal from sentence imposed by Justice John McMahon of the Superior Court of Justice on April 4, 2008; on appeal from sentence imposed by Justice Susanne Goodman of the Superior Court of Justice on June 27, 2008; and on appeal from sentence imposed by Justice Todd Ducharme of the Superior Court of Justice on December 22, 2008.

Appeal Book Endorsement

[1] The primary focus of this appeal was the sentence imposed by Ducharme J. We are satisfied that he did not err in principle and the sentence imposed, even against the background of the sentences imposed by Justices McMahon and Goodman, was fit. As Ducharme J. recognized, given the appellant’s record and the psychiatric evidence, protection of the public was the paramount consideration.

[2] We agree with the trial judge that the totality principle was entitled to little weight. The main reason to reduce an otherwise appropriate sentence because of totality is to avoid imposing a sentence that would crush the accused’s hopes for rehabilitation. It was open to the trial judge to find that rehabilitation was not a factor in this case.

[3] The trial judge was entitled to take into account the other offences which the appellant had committed and his lack of insight into the impact of his conduct. The latter, in particular, was a consideration as to any prospects for rehabilitation and is an important consideration as to his dangerousness. The total sentence although lengthy was appropriate given the seriousness of the offences.

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