2020 ONSC 7551
Court File No. CR-998-17-10108-00
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
v.
PEZHMAN RAZMJOU
P R O C E E D I N G S
BEFORE THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE M. FUERST
on October 1, 2020, at Orillia, Ontario
APPEARANCES:
M. Montemurro Counsel for the Crown
M. Pierce & S. Ponnampalam Counsel for Mr. Razmjou
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
REASONS FOR SENTENCE 1
LEGEND [sic] Indicates preceding word has been reproduced verbatim and is not a transcription error (ph) Indicates preceding word has been spelled phonetically ... Indicates interruption .... Indicates incomplete thought and/or interruption
Transcript Ordered: October 8, 2020
Transcript Completed: December 8, 2020
Ordering Party Notified: December 8, 2020
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2020
R E A S O N S F O R S E N T E N C E
INTRODUCTION
Three men carried out a home invasion robbery at a Richmond Hill apartment, in May 2017. Pezhman Razmjou was one of the three men.
In October 2019, Mr. Razmjou pleaded guilty to robbery and aggravated assault of the victim of the robbery.
At the request of the defence, the sentencing hearing and sentencing were adjourned to February 2020. In February 2020, Mr. Razmjou sought and obtained an adjournment to April 2020. Unfortunately, the suspension of court operations because of COVID-19 intervened, causing a delay until today.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENCES
Shortly before noon on May 11th, 2017, Mr. Razmjou and two other men went to the victim’s address. Mr. Razmjou had been in telephone contact with the victim.
Mr. Razmjou and his two companions were masked. One of the three carried a BB gun. Another carried a metal extendable baton.
The three men went into the victim’s apartment. They placed the victim in handcuffs. They demanded cash and drugs. They threatened to kill him. The victim was beaten with the baton and the BB gun. He suffered serious injuries, including to his head, face, back, left hand, and right leg.
The superintendent of the building came to the front door of the apartment, after receiving a noise complaint. The three perpetrators fled with money and drugs. They left behind the BB gun, which was examined and found to meet the definition of a “firearm”, an unloaded magazine for it, and the baton.
The men left the scene in Mr. Razmjou’s vehicle.
After Mr. Razmjou and the other perpetrators told a third party about the home invasion robbery, the police executed search warrants at Mr. Razmjou’s home and on his motor vehicle. They found in his home a box for the BB gun along with instructions for it; CO2 cartridges and BB pellets; two handcuff keys; a box and holder for an extendable baton; gloves and a ski mask, both with blood staining; and a gym bag with blood staining. Mr. Razmjou admits that all of the seized items were used in the robbery.
Mr. Razmjou was arrested on July 26, 2017, and ordered detained. He was released on bail with Crown consent on January 5th, 2018. He entered his guilty pleas on October 2nd, 2019.
He spent 164 days in pre-trial custody.
THE VICTIM IMPACT INFORMATION
The victim eloquently expressed in his Victim Impact Statement the ongoing emotional and psychological effects of the offences. He was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, anxiety and depression. He continues to suffer on a daily basis. His son and his parents also experienced trauma and stress.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF MR. RAZMJOU
Mr. Razmjou is 29 years old. He was born in Turkey, to parents who relocated there from Iran to escape civil unrest. The family lived in a refugee camp, before moving to Toronto in 1993 when he was a young child. He has a positive relationship with his siblings and parents, especially his mother.
Mr. Razmjou may have been diagnosed with a learning disability as a child. He did not complete high school. He worked as a general labourer in construction and landscaping, and in administrative and customer service positions. He is currently unemployed and receives social assistance.
He has done some volunteer work with a community agency that assists immigrants.
Mr. Razmjou told the pre-sentence reporter that he has suffered from depression and anxiety for a long time. For over a decade he used marijuana and alcohol to deal with his emotional difficulties.
Mr. Razmjou began seeing a psychotherapist in 2019, to address his emotional issues and confusion over his uncertain future and lack of direction. Dr. Sani described Mr. Razmjou as having mild to moderate symptoms of depression. Medication has not been required. Dr. Sani reports that Mr. Razmjou is a smart and curious person, who attends sessions earnestly and looks for positive and effective life alterations.
According to the pre-sentence reporter, Mr. Razmjou appears to have some degree of victim empathy and to recognize the impact of substance use on his own ability to make positive decisions.
Mr. Razmjou expressed in a letter to me that his perspective has changed since the offences. He wants to serve his sentence and move forward.
THE POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES
Crown and defence counsel jointly submit that Mr. Razmjou should be sentenced to five years in jail, less credit for pre-trial custody, time on house arrest bail, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is agreed that the pre-trial custody is eight months when calculated at one and a half to one. The additional credit to be given for time on house arrest bail is 12 months, and the further credit because of the COVID-19 pandemic is four months, for a total of two years. This leaves a sentence to be served of three years in the penitentiary.
ANALYSIS
This was a very serious instance of home invasion robbery. The aggravating factors include:
The offences were carried out as a group activity.
Mr. Razmjou played a critical role in the perpetration of the offences. He telephoned the victim before the group arrived at the apartment, from which I draw the inference that he was integral in setting up the home invasion. It was his vehicle that was the means of transportation to and from the scene. The box from the BB gun and the baton were found in his residence, along with other items used in the commission of the offences.
The three perpetrators were masked, in an effort to conceal their identities.
Weapons were used to inflict significant physical injuries to the victim.
The victim suffered lasting emotional and psychological harm, and his close family members also were affected by the events.
There are a number of mitigating factors. They include:
Mr. Razmjou is a first offender.
He pleaded guilty, which is a sign of remorse and willingness to accept responsibility for his actions.
He expressed remorse to me in the courtroom, which I find is sincere.
He has engaged in psychotherapy, voluntarily.
The pre-sentence reporter indicated that he has some degree of victim empathy and that his attitude is not supportive of future offence-related behaviour.
He has family support, particularly that of his mother, which will be important to his reintegration into the community on his release from jail.
The objectives of sentencing that are paramount in this case are denunciation and deterrence, both general and specific. Rehabilitation of Mr. Razmjou cannot be overlooked, but it plays a lesser role given the seriousness of the offences.
I am satisfied when the aggravation and mitigating circumstances are balanced, the joint submission is an appropriate sentence that satisfies the relevant objectives of sentencing.
CONCLUSION
Mr. Razmjou, I sentence you on count 1 to five years in the penitentiary, less credit for pre-sentence custody of eight months plus credit for restrictive bail conditions of 12 months, and further credit of four months for the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, leaving a sentence to be served of three years in the penitentiary.
On count 2, I sentence you to three years in the penitentiary to be served concurrently.
On both counts I make a s.109(2)(a) weapons prohibition order for 10 years, a s. 109(2)(b) order for life, and a DNA order.
There is a s.734.21 order in respect of the victim and his immediate family members.
Now, if there is a request for any particular medical attention, I am prepared to endorse that, Mr. Ponnampalam, on the warrant of committal.
MR. PONNAMPALAM: One moment of indulgence, Your Honour.
So, Your Honour, my understanding is that Mr. Razmjou doesn’t have his glasses on him and he can’t see even. So, he’s requesting that he turn himself in tomorrow. I....
THE COURT: No, I’ve sentenced him.
MR. PONNAMPALAM: Yes. So, in that case, he needs an appointment with someone....
MR. RAMZJOU: Your Honour, I just want to have a cigarette and just get my glasses. That’s it. I don’t have any problem with anything you said. I’m – that’s it. Forget the cigarette. Can I at least have my glasses? I’m half blind in both eyes. Like, that’s all I want.
THE COURT: Mr. Ponnampalam, then his family members will have to arrange or you will have to arrange with the jail to get his glasses to him. All right? There was – we finished these proceedings in terms of the sentencing hearing before lunch and there was a break of several hours. If the glasses were needed, I would have hoped they could be retrieved during that – sit down, madam. Sit down. Immediately. Sit down or you will be removed from the courtroom.
If the glasses are here, and they can be passed to security staff once I leave the courtroom, that’s fine. People do not get up in the course of the hearing and try to approach others.
MR. RAMZJOU: Sorry. Sorry, Your Honour. My mom’s just passionate. She probably wants to say something to like, try to save me or whatever. I understand what’s going on and I’m not opposed to anything but, the only reason I was asking for a couple of days or a week was just so I can handle a couple of medical issues. I’m not trying to waste the court’s time. I’m not trying to waste your time. So, yeah. That’s all I can say. I’m not going against anybody. When he told me this morning he didn’t tell....
THE COURT: Please be – please be quiet.
The other counts, Ms. Montemurro? I’m not sure....
MS. MONTEMURRO: To be withdrawn, please.
MR. PONNAMPALAM: So Your Honour, just to confirm. There was something in the medicals for an optician or something along the sorts?
THE COURT: I’m sorry, something....?
MR. PONNAMPALAM: An optician, someone to look at his eyes.
THE COURT: All right. So we will endorse on the warrant of committal, please Madam Registrar that he have medical attention for his eyesight.
CLERK REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour.
THE COURT: All right. I have endorsed that the sentencing hearing – you can sit down. Thank you. I have endorsed that the sentencing hearing was completed. Mr. Razmjou is sentenced on count 1 to five years in the penitentiary, less pre-sentence custody of two years in total, leaving a sentence to be served of three years in the penitentiary. A sentence of three years in the penitentiary is imposed concurrent on count 2. There is a DNA order, a s. 109(2)(a) order for 10 years and a s. 109(2)(b) order for life on both counts. And a s.743.21 order in respect to the victim and his immediate family members. The other counts against Mr. Razmjou are withdrawn at the request of the Crown.
MS. MONTEMURRO: Thank you.
E N D O F P R O C E E D I N G S