COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
CITATION: R. v. Minoose, 2012 ONCA 628
DATE: 20120920
DOCKET: C55280
Laskin, Juriansz and Tulloch JJ.A.
BETWEEN
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
and
Kevin Minoose
Appellant
Howard L. Krongold, for the appellant
Matthew Asma, for the respondent
Heard: September 19, 2012
On appeal from the sentence imposed by Justice P. Kane of the Superior Court of Justice dated July 28, 2011.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
[1] The Crown fairly acknowledges that the sentencing judge made two errors in principle: first he wrongly held that the Truth in Sentencing Act precluded him from giving 2:1 credit after the passage of the Act; and second in his Gladue analysis, he wrongly required the appellant to show a causal connection between his aboriginal background and the commission of the offence.
[2] That said, the trial judge gave thoughtful reasons for the sentence he imposed. And, in our view, the sentence he intended to impose would be a fit sentence. We agree with Mr. Krongold that, but for his error on the effect of the statute, the trial judge would have given 2:1 credit throughout. Therefore, giving effect to the trial judge’s intent, we increase the credit given to the appellant for pre-trial custody by a further 17 months. Accordingly, leave to appeal sentence is granted and the appeal is allowed to the extent reflected in this endorsement.