TORONTO — A man who participated in a home invasion had his two-year sentence slashed Monday because he turned his life around while on bail awaiting to appeal his conviction.
In drastically reducing the punishment to seven weeks time served, Ontario's top court said there was little point in insisting that Mahmoud Ghadban, of Ottawa, go back to prison even though he has abandoned his appeal.
While the two-year term initially handed Ghadban was perfectly appropriate, the Court of Appeal unanimously found his circumstances warranted leniency.
"To the extent sentences imposed by the courts 'send a message,' the message sent by reducing the sentence would be that where an offender takes unusual steps to turn his life around, those steps will be recognized by the court," Justice Robert Sharpe wrote in the decision.
"The gain achieved by way of encouraging social peace and harmony from that message would greatly exceed any gain achieved by way of general deterrence and denunciation if he were required to serve the full term of his sentence at this stage."
Ghadban already had convictions for robbery and assault when a Superior Court justice convicted him in June 2012 for his role in the home invasion two years earlier. The then-27-years-old spent 23 hours a day in solitary confinement for seven weeks in a maximum-security facility until his release on bail pending his appeal.
However, the appeal went nowhere — in part because of problems with his lawyers, in part because he was unable to come up with the money to pay them.
Ultimately, Ghadban abandoned the conviction appeal, saying he wanted to take responsibility for his crime. But in pursuing the sentencing appeal, he sought to introduce as fresh evidence the steps he had taken while on bail to getting his life in order.
The Crown did not oppose the fresh evidence, which the Appeal court said indicated "significant steps" toward rehabilitation.
Among other things, Ghadban has married, has two children and taken on parental responsibilities for his wife's older child. He is working, supports his family, has volunteered for a political campaign and a charity, and enjoys strong support from his parents and siblings.
Sharpe called the case unusual, saying that ignoring Ghadban's efforts and the "human realities" of the case would be contrary to "sound sentencing policy and the interests of justice."
Ghadban's life would be devastated if he had to back to prison at this point and his family would be seriously disrupted, the court found.
"We are dealing with a case in which, however inadvertently, the criminal process and the sanction that was imposed have actually worked," Sharpe wrote. "The two sentencing objectives emphasized by the trial judge — specific deterrence and rehabilitation — have now been satisfied."
