Court of Appeal for Ontario

Citation: R. v. Killiktee, 2013 ONCA 332

Date: 20130523

Docket: C56031

Before: Weiler, Blair and Strathy JJ.A.

Between

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

and

Louisa Killiktee

Appellant

Counsel: Howard L. Krongold, for the appellant Holly Loubert, for the respondent

Heard: May 22, 2013

On appeal from the sentence imposed on October 20, 2011 by Justice Lynn D. Ratushny of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting without a jury.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] The appellant, Louisa Killiktee, seeks leave to appeal and, if leave is granted appeals her sentence of 9 years for manslaughter. The appellant submits that the sentence is outside the appropriate range for this offense, which she submits is 4 to 7 years, does not respect the principle of parity in that in R. v. Sakakeep and Keewasin-Gliddy, 2011 ONSC 1854 a young, aboriginal woman received a sentence of six years for manslaughter, and does not give meaningful effect to the appellant’s aboriginal status.

[2] We disagree, that the upper end of the range is seven years. The sentencing judge declined to apply Sakakeep, having regard to the appellant’s inability to abstain from substance abuse and her corresponding increasing aggression as a result of which she posed an increased risk to the community. Thus she not only considered but distinguished Sakakeep.

[3] Further, in our opinion, the sentencing judge gave proper effect to Gladue principles. Her reasons demonstrate great sensitivity to them. She held, however, that while rehabilitative and Gladue objectives must inform a fit sentence, they do not automatically trump other sentencing objectives. The sentencing judge recognized that a fit sentence must meet rehabilitative goals but that in this case public safety was paramount. We see no error in principle in her reasons and the sentence she imposed was fit.

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