Court of Appeal for Ontario

Citation: R. v. Ogbamichael, 2015 ONCA 99

Date: 20150210

Docket: C55501

Before: Doherty, Cronk and LaForme JJ.A.

Between

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

and

Tekle Ogbamichael

Appellant

Counsel:

Lance Beechener, for the appellant

Kevin Rawluk, for the respondent

Heard: February 10, 2015

On appeal from the sentence imposed by Justice Herold of the Superior Court of Justice on February 17, 2012.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] Counsel for the appellant has effectively said all that could be said on behalf of the appellant.

[2] We will proceed on the basis that the appellant has satisfied us that there is an error in principle and we will review the sentence on that basis.

[3] The appellant argues that the appropriate range of sentence includes a sentence of six months. He submits, given the significant immigration consequences flowing from a sentence in excess of six months, that a sentence of just less than six months would be appropriate.

[4] Immigration consequences are relevant in fixing the appropriate sentence. However, immigration considerations cannot justify the imposition of a sentence that falls outside the appropriate range: R. v. Pham, 2013 SCC 15 at para. 11.

[5] Having regard to the appellant’s serious criminal background and the many violations of court orders, we cannot agree that a sentence of six months falls within, or is even close to, the appropriate range. Even if we were inclined to impose a shorter sentence than the trial judge, it would be well above six months.

[6] The appellant has served the sentence. As we understand it, the appellant does not seek a variation of the sentence unless we were prepared to impose a sentence under six months.

[7] Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.