DATE: 20120927
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
B E T W E E N:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
- and -
TSEGAI GHEBREIGZIABIHER
Lorna Spencer, for the Crown
Alonzo Abbey, for the Accused
HEARD: September 11, 2012
KELLY J.
reasons for sentencing
[1] On September 11, 2012 the defendant, Mr. Tsegai Ghebreigziabiher, pleaded guilty to five criminal offences. They are as follows:
a. Aggravated assault on Mr. Yonas Besher;
b. Discharge a firearm at Mr. Yonas Besher with intent to endanger his life;
c. Point a firearm at Ms. Tsegerada Woldemariam; and
d. Possess ammunition (Count 4) and a firearm (Count 5) while prohibited pursuant to a section 109 Order dated January 20, 2010.
[2] All offences arise from a shooting following a birthday party in the west end of Toronto. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher was at large for two weeks following the incident. He has been in custody since his arrest on October 6, 2010.
[3] The Crown seeks a global sentence of 10 years less time served in custody calculated on a ratio of 1 day for 1 day. Counsel for Mr. Ghebreigziabiher seeks a global sentence of 6 to 7 years less time served with enhanced credit of 1.5 days for each day spent in pre-trial custody. I have rejected the submissions of both Counsel.
[4] I have concluded that the appropriate sentence to be imposed is 10 years. I have given Mr. Ghebreigziabiher enhanced credit so that three years will be deducted from his sentence. Accordingly, Mr. Ghebreigziabiher will serve a further seven years in custody.
[5] What follows are my reasons.
The Facts
[6] On Saturday, September 25, 2010 and into the early morning hours of Sunday, September 26, 2010, there was a birthday party for Ms. Tsegereda Woldemariam in a club at 812 Bloor Street West in Toronto. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher and Ms. Woldemariam’s boyfriend, Mr. Yonas Besher, attended.
[7] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher reported that he was at the party talking to Ms. Woldemariam. He did not know that Ms. Woldemariam was Mr. Besher’s girlfriend. During this conversation, Mr. Besher “brushed” Mr. Ghebreigziabiher to move him away from her. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher said that Mr. Besher’s actions made him “feel small”. This push gave Mr. Ghebreigziabiher an opportunity to observe Mr. Besher’s jewelry and he formed the intent to rob him.
[8] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher reported that he watched Mr. Besher for 30 to 60 minutes before the offence because he felt “disrespected” by Mr. Besher. He stated that it did not cross his mind that robbing the victim may be wrong because “when you’ve got a gun in your waistband you feel that you’ve got all the power in the world”.[^1] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher had been carrying a gun that night because he had been shot at a few weeks prior because he was in a “certain area” where other drug dealers did not want him to be.
[9] The party ended at approximately 3:05 a.m. Ms. Woldemariam and Mr. Besher were in the back seat of a vehicle outside the club. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher asked Mr. Besher for a cigarette which he did not have. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher then asked him for his jewelry following which Mr. Besher tried to shut the door. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher drew a 9 mm handgun, pointed and fired it at Mr. Besher. One bullet hit Mr. Besher in the neck, narrowly missing a major blood vessel, entered his jaw, went through his left sinus and came to a rest in the right sinus.
[10] Following the shots, Mr. Besher slumped over. Ms. Woldemariam looked at Mr. Ghebreigziabiher who was pointing the gun at her. People intervened and one friend, Ms. Gigi Tesfamariam bit Mr. Ghebreigziabiher on the face. No further shots were fired.
[11] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher said that it was not his intention to shoot Mr. Besher, but to scare him. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher fled the scene but returned shortly thereafter, having disposed of his jacket and changed his appearance.
[12] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher reported that he returned to the scene to see if he could steal Mr. Besher’s necklace saying “that was all [that was on] my mind”. He was confronted by one of the witnesses to the shooting and fled again. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher reported that he “was hesitating as to whether to shoot him [the witness]”. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher did not turn himself into police, but was arrested two weeks later.
[13] Mr. Besher was treated in a Toronto hospital and returned to Ohio thereafter. The bullet remains lodged in his sinus and he continues to experience medical complications as a result.
The Impact on the Victims
[14] Mr. Besher has suffered traumatic injuries. Pictures were filed in this proceeding illustrating the damage done to his face. His injuries required significant medical attention and the bullet remains lodge in his right sinus area.
[15] Although no victim impact statements were filed at the sentencing hearing, it is trite to say that a shooting on the streets of Toronto at 3:00 a.m. following a birthday party have been traumatic not only for the victims: Mr. Besher and Ms. Woldemariam, but for the witnesses as well.
[16] The purpose of the party was to celebrate the birthday of Ms. Woldemariam. Rather than the party ending with fire on the birthday cake candles, it ended with the fire coming out of the barrel of a gun. Ms. Woldemariam had to witness the terror inflicted on her boyfriend as she watched him being shot at close range only to find herself staring at the barrel of the handgun as Mr. Ghebreigziabiher turned it on her.
[17] Witnesses had to jump to the defence of the victims knowing that a gun had just been fired, jeopardizing their own safety. This is not how a party is supposed to end or how our streets in Toronto are to be utilized. I find that such an event had to be devastating for all those present.
Personal Background
a. Family
[18] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher is 28 years-old. He emigrated from Eritrea as a refugee at nine years of age and is one of seven siblings. He is a Canadian citizen and has a grade 12 education.
[19] Prior to his incarceration on October 6, 2010 Mr. Ghebreigziabiher was living in a Toronto Community Housing apartment with his father and stepmother. He is not currently in a relationship, but believes that he may have an eight year-old daughter from a prior relationship.
b. Employment
[20] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has worked primarily in the service industry (movie theatre, grocery store, etc.). His longest period of employment was a three-year stint in a concession stand at the Skydome. He has also been employed by Toronto Community Housing answering phones to help coordinate emergency repairs. He did this for two years and then left because he had “heard a few stories” about how he could “hustle” in Calgary.
[21] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher does not seem to have been employed in the traditional sense at the time of the offences. He was collecting welfare and engaged in the illegal drug trade by his own admission. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has described that his most consistent form of income was from trafficking in illegal narcotics: crack and cannabis.
c. Criminal Antecedents
[22] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has a criminal record containing the following entries:
| Date | Offence | Sentence |
|---|---|---|
| June 7, 2006 | Assault | Absolute discharge |
| January 20, 2010 | Assault with intent to resist arrest | 1 day |
| Failure to comply with recognizance | 1 day | |
| Trafficking in cocaine | 110 days of pre-trial custody plus one day in custody, together with the imposition of a section 109 weapons prohibition | |
| January 22, 2010 | Failure to comply with recognizance | 1 day |
[23] The entries on the criminal record do not illuminate the entirety of Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s criminal antecedents.
[24] The Court was enlightened about the depth of Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s involvement in a criminal lifestyle by certain admissions he made during a two-hour interview at the Toronto Jail conducted by Dr. Andrew Morgan,[^2] a Resident in psychiatry. Those admissions were included in a report provided by Dr. Scott M. Woodside, LL.B., M.D., FRCP(C)[^3] and Dr. Morgan. It was filed by Counsel for Mr. Ghebreigziabiher. I was not advised that any of the content was incorrect.
[25] In the report, Mr. Ghebreigziabiher provided details regarding his criminal lifestyle as follows:
a. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher was fired from the movie theatre because he was caught stealing money from the cash register.
b. At age 16 Mr. Ghebreigziabiher was arrested for being in possession of counterfeit bills that he purchased at school and tried to use in stores.
c. At age 19 or 20 Mr. Ghebreigziabiher was arrested for possession of crack cocaine which he had intended to sell. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher reports that the charge was dismissed due to an illegal search.
d. At age 22 or 23, Mr. Ghebreigziabiher was arrested for possession of cannabis and received a conditional discharge.
e. At age 25 Mr. Ghebreigziabiher was arrested for possession of crack cocaine, proceeds of crime and resisting arrest, giving rise to the convictions in January, 2010. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher said that he was dealing drugs and alerted friends to the presence of a person he suspected was an undercover police officer. He said that he tried to run from the officer, but the officer began beating him up and he was tasered on two occasions.
f. In 2010, Mr. Ghebreigziabiher moved to Calgary. He was caught by police with a .357 Magnum handgun and $25,000 in cash. He received a conditional discharge due to a finding that the search was illegal.
g. During his spare time, Mr. Ghebreigziabiher likes “chilling out” and “smoking weed”.
h. Prior to his arrest, Mr. Ghebreigziabiher usually smoked three “cannabis joints” per week and he did not feel that cannabis had an adverse effect on his functioning.
i. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher would have used cannabis more frequently if he had had more money.
j. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher carried “a gun for much of his adult life for ‘protection’ given his work as a drug dealer”.
k. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher had never, up to this point, pointed a firearm at another person, but he had taken “practice shots” in a “park” and once “accidentally shot an empty movie trailer when he was loading the weapon”.
[26] In the report of Dr. Woodside and under the heading of “Self Concept”, Mr. Ghebreigziabiher described himself as “satisfied”, “honest” and concluded that “I’m not a violent guy”.
d. Mental Health
[27] I am advised that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher was seen by a psychiatrist while in custody on his last set of charges to see if he had “issues”. However, there was no diagnosis. He has never sought any mental health care nor has it been suggested that he seek treatment of any kind.
[28] The report authored by Dr. Woodside was provided in response to a request from Counsel for Mr. Ghebreigziabiher. Counsel had requested that there be an independent psychiatric consultation and assessment of criminal responsibility of Mr. Ghebreigziabiher. The report filed suggests that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher “would meet the diagnostic criteria for antisocial personality disorder” and that a “cannabis abuse disorder cannot be fully ruled out at this time”.
e. Counseling
[29] Since he has been incarcerated on these charges, Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has been in counseling for both alcohol and drug abuse. He is contemplating attending a residential treatment upon release through the John Howard society. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher reports that Mr. Peter Markewell is going to help him prepare a solid release plan.
f. Community Support
[30] It was obvious from this proceeding that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has tremendous support from his community. At one point, I counted over 20 of his supporters who attended at the Courthouse during the sentencing phase of this hearing. This included members of Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s immediate family as well as numerous friends.
[31] Mr. Girmay Fesshaye provided a letter of support and indicated that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has an employment opportunity upon his release at Pin Media Group. Pin Media Group has a series of web based properties that could use Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s services.
[32] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher also has support of friends such as Ms. Arsema Berhane who have known him for many years as a contributor to the community. She advised the Court that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher is well liked and has been a vibrant member of the TCHC Youth Economic Opportunities Forum organizing an event: “Get Your Hustle On”.
[33] Mr. Ian Kamau Prieto-McTair described Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s involvement in a leadership program called “School without Borders”. Mr. Taiwo Bah described Mr. Ghebreigziabiher as “witty, charming and charitable to a fault”.
g. Remorse
[34] In a letter authored by Mr. Ghebreigziabiher and provided to the Court during this proceeding, Mr. Ghebreigziabiher expressed remorse. He takes full responsibility for his behaviour and apologizes to all who were affected by his actions. In particular, he apologizes to Mr. Besher.
Analysis
[35] The questions that I must answer with respect to sentencing Mr. Ghebreigziabiher are as follows:
a. What is the fit sentence?
b. Should Mr. Ghebreigziabiher receive enhanced credit for time served?
a. What is the fit sentence?
[36] As stated above, Crown Counsel is seeking a global sentence of ten years for these offences. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher is seeking a global sentence of 6 to 7 years. In my view, the appropriate sentence is 10 years less time served calculated on the basis of 1.5 to 1 days in pre-trial custody.
[37] Section 718 of the Criminal Code outlines the objectives of sentencing. It is a fundamental principle of sentencing that the sentence imposed be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender. Although I may consider other conduct of Mr. Ghebreigziabiher the question that must be answered is this: “What should THIS offender receive for THIS offence, committed in the circumstances in which it was committed?”
[38] A review of the cases provided demonstrates that the appropriate range for offences of this nature is 7 to 11 years in custody. This range was outlined in the case of R. v. Bellissimo[^4] which I find similar to the case before me. It is a case where Mr. Bellissimo fired several shots into a restaurant. One shot significantly injured one person, another caused a minor injury to a second person and a third shot narrowly missed killing a third person.
[39] The Ontario Court of Appeal found that the range of sentence for these kinds of serious gun related offences is between 7 and 11 years and that a sentence of 10 years less dead time was appropriate. I believe that the circumstances in Bellissimo are applicable here.
[40] Counsel for Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has provided the Court with a number of cases for consideration, all of which can be distinguished either on the facts or due to the criminal antecedents of the person convicted. For example, in the case of R. v. Melo[^5], the trial judge sentenced Mr. Melo to five years less time served. That case was a domestic situation where Mr. Melo used a loaded rifle to intimidate his wife at a settlement meeting in a family law proceeding.
[41] R. v. Hassan[^6] is a case similar to the one before me based on the facts. Mr. Hassan was found guilty of aggravated assault following a nine-day jury trial. Mr. Hassan had played in a basketball game against the victim and his friends. Later in the parking lot, words were exchanged; Mr. Hassan drew a gun and shot into the car, hitting his victim. He was given a sentence of eight years. Mr. Hassan’s criminal record was less serious than Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s as he had a record for assault and uttering threats for which he received a conditional discharge and probation. Further, there was only one victim of Mr. Hassan’s crime.
[42] R. v. Larmond[^7] is another case similar to the one before me. Mr. Larmond was sentenced to 7 years for aggravated assault. He shot a person in a parking lot in the abdomen following the discussion of a drug debt with one of Mr. Larmond’s associates. Mr. Larmond had a minor criminal record for which he had spent no time in custody. It was also likely that he would be deported. This case, in my view, can be contrasted to the criminal record accumulated by Mr. Ghebreigziabiher.
[43] General deterrence and denunciation must be the paramount considerations of this Court in a case involving a handgun and the use Mr. Ghebreigziabiher made of it in these circumstances. I find the following to be aggravating factors in sentencing:
a. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher shot Mr. Besher at close range because he felt “disrespected” by Mr. Besher due to a push and he wanted Mr. Besher’s jewelry.
b. The gun was fired and the injury was caused while Mr. Besher’s girlfriend sat inches away from him. Then Mr. Ghebreigziabiher turned the gun on Ms. Woldemariam.
c. These offences occurred following a birthday party and others witnessed the offences that occurred on a public street in the City of Toronto.
d. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher then returned to the scene in order to steal the jewelry and he contemplated shooting one of the citizens who tried to detain him.
e. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher fled and was only arrested two weeks after the offence date.
f. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has a criminal record as outlined above.
g. The crimes are obviously serious and there are two victims in addition to others present.
h. This set of offences was committed approximately 8 months after Mr. Ghebreigziabiher was sentenced and the section 109 order was imposed prohibiting him from possessing weapons and ammunition.
[44] I find the following factors to be mitigating:
a. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher is relatively young: 28 years of age.
b. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher pleaded guilty to the five offences before the Court following a preliminary hearing and a number of judicial pre-trials in the Superior Court of Justice. It is my understanding that he had expressed his intention to plead guilty early in the proceedings.
c. I am advised that Mr. Besher has never had to appear to testify in these proceedings. He is apparently residing in Ohio at this time.
d. The pleas of guilt saved significant resources in the Superior Court of Justice in Toronto. I have reviewed a civilian witness list and it appears that, at least, 14 civilian witnesses were spared the necessity of testifying.
e. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has expressed remorse.
f. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has tremendous support from both his family and members of his community.
g. The witnesses who testified on Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s behalf have demonstrated that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher is capable of being a contributing member of our society. He has a job prospect upon his release.
h. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has indicated that he is attending drug and alcohol programs weekly while he has been incarcerated. He reports that he is doing well in the programs.
i. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has indicated a willingness to seek further treatment which demonstrates some insight into his problems.
[45] Counsel attempted to persuade me that there was a medical or mental issue that should be a mitigating factor. I accept that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher would meet the diagnostic criteria for antisocial personality disorder and possibly a cannabis abuse disorder. However, for such an illness to be considered as a mitigating factor in sentencing, Mr. Ghebreigziabiher must show a causal link between his illness and his criminal conduct. In other words, was Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s illness an underlying reason for his aberrant conduct?[^8] In my view, the answer to that question is “no”.
[46] Although members of Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s family and extended family expressed some concern about Mr. Ghebreigziabiher and his paranoia, etc. it appears that it was not such a great concern. Nobody insisted that he follow up for treatment after his last release from custody.
[47] Witnesses testified in an attempt to provide a foundation for the consideration of mental illness as a mitigating factor. For example, friends and family described that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher was a vibrant and contributing member of society and that prior to these offences, they had noticed a marked change, particularly in his appearance. One example given by his friend was that his personal hygiene had deteriorated. When asked for an example of this deterioration, she gave the following answer:
… He was definitely somebody who, before when I first met him, would not be seen without a fresh pair of running shoes. And there were times when I saw him more recently where that was not the case.
[48] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s brother-in-law suggested that he had become paranoid in the time leading up to these offences. The paranoia that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s brother noticed may have been the result of Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s involvement in the drug trade and his habitual use of cannabis. As Mr. Ghebreigziabiher described himself: he has been using marijuana since he was in his mid-teens which calmed him down but also gave him “paranoid thoughts”.
[49] Further, there must be some evidence that a lengthy sentence would have a severe negative effect on Mr. Ghebreigziabiher such that it should be reduced on compassionate grounds. There is no suggestion that that is the case before me.[^9]
[50] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher was found to meet the diagnostic criteria for antisocial personality disorder and possibly a cannabis abuse disorder. However, there is no suggestion that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher did not appreciate the consequences of his actions. The report states: “… he clearly knew the wrongfulness of his actions and was aware of the potential consequences. He targeted the victim for a robbery because he felt the victim had disrespected him”.
[51] In my view, the evidence before me does not support the conclusion that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s antisocial personality disorder or cannabis abuse disorder should support the submission that this should be considered a mitigating factor. There is no causal link between his illness and his behaviour. Further, there was no evidence that the negative impact of prison would reach the level required to reduce a sentence.
b. Should Mr. Ghebreigziabiher receive enhanced credit for time served?
[52] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher seeks enhanced credit for the time he has spent in custody since his arrest on October 6, 2010. This request is determined by the Criminal Code in sections 719(3) and (3.1). These two subsections limit pre-sentence custody credit to 1 for 1 or 1.5 to 1. Section 719(3.1) provides that “if the circumstances justify it” the Court can give the accused person 1.5 days’ credit for each day served in pre-trial custody.
[53] I do believe that circumstances justify enhanced credit in these circumstances. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher has advised the Court that he has spent all of his pre-trial custody in the Don Jail. He has been there since October 6, 2010 and he describes the living conditions as “harsh”. He describes:
a. living three to a cell which is more than the cell was built to accommodate;
b. being subjected to many “unwarranted lockdowns”; and
c. having to “stand up” for his “allotment” of food.
[54] While I appreciate that the conditions in the Don Jail may not be ideal, I also consider that enhanced credit would be appropriate for the following reasons:
a. It is clear that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher wanted to plead guilty at an early stage of the proceedings. I was advised that he expressed such a desire during a brief appearance in the Ontario Court of Justice by way of video.
b. The matter may not have proceeded as expeditiously to trial or resolution as desired because:
i. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher had to consult with the psychiatrist;
ii. A report of the psychiatrist had to be prepared;
iii. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher appeared for a number of judicial pre-trials in this Court to attempt to resolve things;
iv. It appears that there was considerable negotiation of the facts;
v. When the matter came before me, a new indictment was filed withdrawing the charge of attempt murder and replacing it with aggravated assault; and
vi. The parties attempted to plead guilty in this Court a number of times but were unable to do so due to my own time constraints and schedule.
[55] For these reasons, I find that Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s circumstances justify enhanced credit for time served. As of this date, he has served approximately 10 days less than two years in prison. In the circumstances, I find that he has served two years in custody and he will be given credit for three years, time served.
Conclusion
[56] In coming to my conclusion regarding sentencing, I have considered the evidence provided to the Court by way of the report from Drs. Woodside and Morgan. As stated, the report was created after having interviewed Mr. Ghebreigziabiher. He provided insight into his background and in particular, his character and lifestyle.
[57] The sentence imposed in these circumstances is not intended to punish Mr. Ghebreigziabiher for criminal conduct for which he was neither charged nor convicted. Mr. Ghebreigziabiher is not being given a greater sentence for such conduct, but the evidence is properly considered by this Court to demonstrate his “character, conduct and attitude”. In my view, that evidence is particularly relevant in light of the evidence provided to the Court regarding Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s good character.[^10]
[58] I also take into consideration that this is Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s first penitentiary sentence. Although he has served a sentence as an adult, it was not a long one.[^11]
[59] Although this is a lengthy first sentence in the penitentiary, the offences in this case are extremely serious. This was an unprovoked attack on Mr. Besher in a public place. The assault was committed against strangers and the injuries were serious and could have caused death. It is a fundamental principle of sentencing that the sentence imposed be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender. In my view, the sentence addresses both the principle of totality and considers the fact that this is Mr. Ghebreigziabiher’s first trip to the penitentiary.
[60] For the above-mentioned reasons, I sentence Mr. Ghebreigziabiher to ten years less time served of three years. Accordingly, Mr. Ghebreigziabiher will be required to serve another seven years in custody.
[61] The sentence will be recorded as follows:
| Count | Offence | Sentence |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Aggravated Assault: s. 268 | 9 years |
| 2 | Discharge Firearm: s. 244(b) | 4 years concurrent to Count 1 |
| 3 | Point Firearm: S. 87(1) | 2 years concurrent to Counts 1 and 2 |
| 4 | Possession of Ammunition While prohibited by a Court Order | 1 year concurrent to Count 5 |
| 5 | Possession of a Firearm While Prohibited by a Court Order | 1 year consecutive to Counts 1, 2 and 3 |
[62] Mr. Ghebreigziabiher will also be subject to the following orders:
a. That he provide such samples of his bodily substances as may be required for forensic analysis pursuant to s. 487.051(b) of the Criminal Code;
b. A weapons prohibition for life pursuant to s. 109 of the Criminal Code; and
c. An order pursuant to s. 743.21(1) of the Criminal Code providing that he have no contact directly or indirectly with those persons referred to on the list attached hereto as Appendix “A”.
Kelly J.
Released: September 27, 2012
appendix “A”
Pursuant to s. 743.21(1) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46, Mr. Ghebreigziabiher is to have no contact directly or indirectly with those persons referred to below:
Nasra ABASS
Hela ALI
Yonas BESHER
Samranit-Koral GEBRE-HIWET
Shamaq IBRAHIM
Farah McDOOM
Elohe MESHESHA
Rebka MESSELE
James SCHEDLICK
Tihitina SOLOMON
Gigi TESFMARIAM
Luis VEGA
Shilan WOLDEMARIAM
Tsegereda WOLDEMARIAM
DATE: 20120927
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
B E T W E E N:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
- and -
TSEGAI GHEBREIGZIABIHER
reasons for sentencing
Kelly J.
Released: September 27, 2012
[^1]: There was no pre-sentence report filed in this proceeding. However, a letter from Dr. Scott Woodside and Dr. Andrew Morgan, dated April 11, 2012, was filed. This letter included references to an interview conducted by Dr. Morgan with Mr. Ghebreigziabiher at the Toronto Jail on January 6, 2011. Several comments were made by Mr. Ghebreigziabiher during this interview and are referred to in these reasons. [^2]: Dr. Andrew Morgan is a Resident in Psychiatry, Law & Mental Health Program, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health [^3]: Dr. S. Woodside is described as the Staff Psychiatrist and Lead Clinician, Acute Assessment Services; Clinical Head, Sexual Behaviours Clinic, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Law & Mental Health Program; and Lecturer in Psychiatry, University of Toronto. [^4]: 2009 ONCA 49, [2009] O.J. No. 179 (C.A.). See also: R. v. Smith, 1997 CanLII 832 (ON CA), [1997] O.J. No. 4797 (C.A.). [^5]: 2012 ONCA 562 [^6]: 2011 ONCA 407 [^7]: 2011 ONSC 7170 [^8]: See: R. v. Robinson, [1974] O.J. No. 585 (C.A.) [^9]: R. v. Prioriello 2012 ONCA 63 [^10]: See: R. v. Edwards, 2001 CanLII 24105 (ON CA), [2001] O.J. No. 2582 (C.A.); R. v. Inwood (1989), 1989 CanLII 263 (ON CA), 48 C.C.C. (3d) 173 (Ont. C.A.); Lees v. The Queen (1979), 1979 CanLII 43 (SCC), 46 C.C.C. (2d) 385 (S.C.C.) [^11]: See: R. v. Borde, (2003) 2003 CanLII 4187 (ON CA), 63 O.R. (3d) 417 (C.A.) at para. 36