Crown wants higher sentence in fatal crash case
Pointing to the province’s dismal impaired driving statistics, Crown prosecutor Dean Sinclair argued a far harsher sentence is called for in the case of a young man who crashed his car into the back of a semi, killing one passenger and injuring two others.
“The offence of impaired driving causing death is a too-common offence in this jurisdiction,” Sinclair argued before the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal on Thursday. “Saskatchewan has one of the highest, if not the highest provincial rate of impaired driving in the country ... The law and relevant case authority is very clear: When it comes to impaired driving offences, consequences matter.”
Maninder Pal Kang (also identified from time to time as Maninderpal Kang) was found guilty in January 2014 of impaired driving causing death, two counts of impaired driving causing bodily harm and one count each of leaving the scene and refusal to provide a breath sample. Despite the Crown’s argument for a seven-year prison term, Queen’s Bench Justice Catherine Dawson imposed a sentence closer to that requested by defence lawyer Bob Hrycan, handing down a total of 30 months in addition to a three-year driving prohibition and a $1,000 fine for the refusal.
The Crown sought leave to appeal and, on Thursday, argued its case before the province’s highest court, again asking for a seven-year sentence. The Court of Appeal — represented by Justices Gary Lane, Neal Caldwell and Peter Whitmore — reserved its decision.
As is typically the case, a date for the return of the decision was not specified.
Kang was 18 at the time of the June 2007 collision that left Sukhminder Singh Khuber dead and two teenage girls with serious head injuries. While Kang denied he was intoxicated at the time and refused to provide a breath sample to police, Dawson found he was impaired when he sped down Victoria Avenue and rearended a semi stopped for a red light at Fleet Street. With his passengers badly injured, Kang drove from the scene, stopping several minutes later in a residential neighbourhood to call 911. While he initially claimed his car had been stolen, his story quickly unravelled.
Khuber — known to family and friends by the nickname Lucky — died in hospital.
In arguing the sentence imposed was unfit, Sinclair (who was not the prosecutor at trial) argued it wasn’t proportionate to the gravity of the offence or Kang’s degree of responsibility, and that it wasn’t on par with more recent Canadian cases in which far lengthier terms were imposed for similar offences. Sinclair added that the sentencing judge gave Kang credit for certain personal circumstances — such as his youth and lack of prior criminal record — when she should have placed additional focus on details such as Kang’s poor provincial driving record and lack of “genuine” remorse.
But Kang’s lawyer Bob Hrycan urged the court to leave the sentence as is, arguing the term is well in line with Saskatchewan case law from around the same time period. Hrycan took issue with the Crown’s claim that Kang hadn’t shown true remorse, stating there was no requirement for him to apologize for offences for which he argued he was not guilty.
While other provinces have more recently imposed heftier sentences for fatal impaired driving cases, Hrycan argued the court should confine itself to this province’s case law.
“Saskatchewan precedents should guide Saskatchewan courts ...” he said. “The fact is the sentence is within the range.”
Prior to deciding the merits of the Crown’s appeal, the Court of Appeal has to first decide whether it can even issue a decision in this case, given issues such as Kang’s complaint of delay in moving the appeal forward.