WARNING

The court hearing this matter directs that the following notice be attached to the file:

This is a case under the Youth Criminal Justice Act and is subject to subsections 110(1) and 111(1) and section 129 of the Act. These provisions read as follows:

110. IDENTITY OF OFFENDER NOT TO BE PUBLISHED — (1) Subject to this section, no person shall publish the name of a young person, or any other information related to a young person, if it would identify the young person as a young person dealt with under this Act.

111. IDENTITY OF VICTIM OR WITNESS NOT TO BE PUBLISHED — (1) Subject to this section, no person shall publish the name of a child or young person, or any other information related to a child or a young person, if it would identify the child or young person as having been a victim of, or as having appeared as a witness in connection with, an offence committed or alleged to have been committed by a young person.

129. NO SUBSEQUENT DISCLOSURE — No person who is given access to a record or to whom information is disclosed under this Act shall disclose that information to any person unless the disclosure is authorized under this Act.

Subsection 138(1) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, which deals with the consequences of failure to comply with these provisions, states as follows:

138. OFFENCES — Every person who contravenes subsection 110(1) (identity of offender not to be published), 111(1) (identity of victim or witness not to be published) . . . or section 129 (no subsequent disclosure) . . .

(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Court Information

Ontario Court of Justice

Date: 2018-05-30

Court File No.: Newmarket Y14-0712

Between:

Her Majesty the Queen

— and —

JT

YCJA Sentence Review

Application Heard: 30 May, 2018

Delivered: 30 May, 2018

Counsel

Mr. Anthonie Vanden Ende — Counsel for the Crown

JT — Applicant Appearing on his Own Behalf

Decision

KENKEL J.:

Introduction

[1] JT went to a high school semi-formal dance armed with a knife. He stabbed another young person during an altercation in a washroom. JT was subject to youth sentences at the time which included terms that he not possess a knife or any weapon. He obstructed the police investigation by providing a false name to the police. He was convicted at trial of Aggravated Assault, Obstruct Police, Personation, Possession of a Weapon Dangerous to the Public Peace and two counts of Failing to Comply with a Youth Sentence.

[2] JT served 5 days in pre-trial custody. He was sentenced to a 3 month custody and supervision order, followed by two years of probation. During the two months spent in open custody he complied with the rules of the facility and took counselling as directed. He's been employed since his release in an auto detailing business he started with his uncle. That business has occupied much of his time and his family says they've seen positive changes. Probation reports that JT has been polite and engaged throughout.

Sentence Termination

[3] JT applies for early termination of his probation which expires July 24, 2019. He's been subject to this sentence for just over one year and one month. His application is being considered at this juncture because at 20, he's reached an age where his supervision would be transferred to the adult system. Given his compliance with the sentence to date, the youth probation officer supports an early termination.

[4] This case had an unusual path through court. It's been almost three and a half years since the offences and JT has plainly matured during that time. The victim was not known to him. While I understand the Crown's request for the continuation of the no contact, boundary and weapons terms, given the lengthy time in this case without incident I don't find that's necessary any longer in the public interest. Considering the purpose and principles of sentencing set out in s.38 of the Youth Criminal Justice Act SC 2002 c1, and the accused's progress to date as a material change under s.59(2), I agree with the applicant that early termination is appropriate. That does not in any way diminish the gravity of the offences or reduce consideration of the harm done to the victim as reflected in the overall sentence.

[5] JT's sentence is terminated as of this date pursuant to s.59(7)(b).

Delivered: May 30, 2018

Justice Joseph F. Kenkel