Canada Supreme Court hears appeal for man who killed toddler in patio crash

15:56  12 october  2017
15:56  12 october  2017 Source:   Edmonton Journal

Supreme Court hears breath sample case

  Supreme Court hears breath sample case The lawyer for a man charged in a fatal crash that killed a toddler has told the Supreme Court his client has been through enough. Richard Suter is appealing his 26-month sentence for refusing to provide a breath sample after his SUV crashed into a restaurant patio, killing two-year-old Geo Mounsef.On Wednesday, defence lawyer Dino Bottos told the Supreme Court his client was given bad legal advice after the 2013 crash — don't give a breath sample and don't talk to anyone.

A man who crashed his SUV onto an Edmonton restaurant patio , killing a young boy, is seeking leave to appeal his sentence to the Supreme Court .

The Edmonton man who crashed his SUV into a patio in 2013, killing a two-year-old boy, has told his lawyer he "feels somewhat relieved" the Supreme Court of Canada has granted leave to appeal his sentence.

The Supreme Court of Canada heard arguments Wednesday over the sentencing of Richard Suter, a man convicted of crashing his SUV into a restaurant patio and killing a two-year-old boy.

Not at question were the facts of the case.

Suter pleaded guilty in 2015 to a charge of refusing to provide a breath sample following a collision causing death.

Former coworker identifies woman killed in Anthony Henday Drive crash

  Former coworker identifies woman killed in Anthony Henday Drive crash A former coworker describes the 28-year-old woman killed in a crash on Anthony Henday Drive Saturday as a bubbly and outgoing person.David St. Jean worked with Stuetz on his real estate team in January for about six months before Stuetz left to work for Realty Executives Vision. He described her as a great coworker who was passionate about her three young children and her career as a realtor.

Edmonton man who killed toddler in patio crash given longer sentence. “Now the Crown has to respond to that written argument and then the Supreme Court will decide whether it will allow us to have a full appeal on the merits,” Bottos explained.

Driver who killed toddler in patio crash 'relieved' by Supreme Court appeal . The Supreme Court of Canada heard a rare sentencing appeal Wednesday in the case of an Edmonton man sent to prison for 26 months for failing to provide a breath sample.

In that collision, Suter — while arguing with his wife — mistakenly stepped on the accelerator rather than the brake and smashed his SUV through a restaurant patio, striking several people and killing two-year-old Geo Mounsef in 2013.

While in a holding cell, Suter spoke with a lawyer who advised him not to provide a breath sample to police, advice Suter followed.

Citing mitigating factors including a mistake of law in following the lawyer’s advice and injuries suffered both physically and emotionally from public outrage and an act of vigilante justice — where Suter was kidnapped, beaten and had his thumb cut off — Suter was initially handed a four-month sentence and a 30-month driving suspension.

Hawaiian heiress, 91, marries woman amid court battle

  Hawaiian heiress, 91, marries woman amid court battle Hawaiian heiress, 91, marries woman amid court battleRetired Hawaii Supreme Court Justice Steven Levinson says he presided over the wedding of Abigail Kawananakoa and Veronica Gail Worth during a ceremony Sunday at his Honolulu home.

Error 404: Page Not Found. "UNSOLVED CASES: Who killed Sonia Mejia?"

'Boys Don't Cry' Inmate Appeals to Supreme Court .

The Crown appealed this sentence, and the Alberta Court of Appeal increased Suter’s punishment, imposing a sentence of 26 months behind bars, which Suter then appealed to the Supreme Court.

Suter served 9-1/2 months before making bail pending his Supreme Court appeal.

On behalf of the Crown, Joanne Dartana argued Wednesday that Suter’s refusal to provide a breath sample was based in strategy rather than honest belief: “On the evidence, the sentencing judge could not have found that the appellant had an honest belief in the lawfulness of his actions.”

But Dino Bottos argued his client refused the breath sample because of a lawyer’s bad advice, and that Suter had been “baffled by jargon.”

“Mr. Suter drew a mistaken inference based on the lawyer’s advice, which was ‘Don’t blow,’” said Bottos.

Also at issue is the degree to which acts of vigilante justice and public shame should be taken into account as mitigating factors on sentencing.

“Mr. Suter not only suffered public shame, vitriol, hatred and was vilified, but what happens when that crystallizes into an actual episode of serious vigilante justice, when the fact is that crystallizes into giving a pound of flesh for having committed the crime?” Bottos said, arguing for a reduction in his client’s sentence.

There is no set date for the Supreme Court to render its decision.

twitter.com/ClaireTheobald

ctheobald@postmedia.com

Mark Edward Grant, who was convicted of killing Candace Derksen, found not guilty at 2nd trial .
A man convicted in 2011 of second-degree murder in the death of a teen girl was found not guilty today following a retrial. A Court of Queen's Bench judge found Mark Edward Grant, 53, not guilty of second-degree murder in the 1984 death of Candace Derksen, 13.In 2011, a jury had found Grant guilty in the teen's slaying."The totality of the evidence before me ... falls short of the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt," Justice Karen Simonsen told a packed courtroom in Winnipeg on Wednesday afternoon.The ruling concluded the judge-only retrial that started in January.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

This is interesting!