Court of Appeal for Ontario

Date: 2018-03-09 Docket: C62892

Judges: Pardu, Benotto and Nordheimer JJ.A.

Between

Her Majesty the Queen Respondent

and

Troy Pitters Appellant

Counsel

Troy Pitters, acting in person via videoconference

Lorna Bolton, for the respondent

Megan Savard, duty counsel

Heard and released orally: March 7, 2018

On Appeal

On appeal from the sentence imposed on October 24, 2016 by Justice John R. Sproat of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting without a jury.

Reasons for Decision

[1] Mr. Pitters appeals his sentence of 15 years for attempted murder, along with 1.5 years consecutive on two counts of failure to comply with probation.

[2] The background facts are very disturbing. Mr. Pitters repeatedly harassed a female that he knew from school. He was ultimately charged and convicted with criminal harassment. A few months after that conviction, Mr. Pitters appeared at the home of the female and her family. He was armed with weapons and homemade bombs. A confrontation occurred between Mr. Pitters and members of the family. Mr. Pitters stabbed one of the members of the family multiple times inflicting serious injuries.

[3] The sentencing judge gave considered reasons for the sentences he imposed. Given the facts underlying the offence, we are of the view that the sentence imposed was an entirely appropriate one. It falls within the range of sentences for this type of offence: see R. v. Stubbs, 2013 ONCA 514, 300 C.C.C. (3d) 181, at para. 148.

[4] Attempted murder is one of the most serious offences under our law. The violence in this case was unprovoked and gratuitous. It called for a sentence that promoted deterrence and denunciation.

[5] That said, the Crown accepts that the sentences for the two failure to comply convictions ought to have been concurrent, not consecutive one to the other. Other than for that acknowledgement, we are of the view that an overall sentence of 16 years was appropriate in this case given the conduct involved. Given that view, we do not have to address the issue of consecutive versus concurrent sentences when considering the failures to comply with the attempted murder.

[6] The appeal is allowed but only to the extent of making the sentences for the failure to comply offences concurrent rather than consecutive, thus reducing the overall 16.5 year sentence to one of 16 years before credit is given for pre-sentence custody.

G. Pardu J.A.

M.L. Benotto J.A.

I.V.B. Nordheimer J.A.