Thunder Bay man faces robbery, forcible entry and other charges after a Pine Street investigation

THUNDER BAY — A 43-year-old Thunder Bay man has been remanded into custody after a Thunder Bay Police Service investigation that began with a reported theft in the Pine Street area.

Police say members of the Primary Response Unit were dispatched to the area on July 26 after receiving a call for service. The person police were seeking had left before officers arrived, but a search of the surrounding area resulted in an arrest.

Thunder Bay man faces four charges

As a result of the investigation, Brandon Smith, 43, of Thunder Bay has been charged with:

• robbery — violence immediately before or after;
• mischief under $5,000;
• forcible entry; and
• failure to comply with a release order.

Police have not released further details about what was allegedly taken, the nature of the alleged violence or property damage, or the specific release condition Smith is accused of breaching.

Smith was remanded into custody following his first court appearance.

A remand order means an accused remains in custody while the case proceeds. It is not a finding of guilt.

None of the allegations have been proven in court. Smith is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.

Robbery — violence immediately before or after

The robbery allegation corresponds with Section 343 of the Criminal Code.

Under Section 343(b), robbery includes stealing from another person while wounding, beating, striking or using personal violence against that person at the time of the theft, immediately before it or immediately afterward.

Robbery is prosecuted as an indictable offence. Under Section 344, robbery where the specific firearm provisions do not apply carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

That is the statutory maximum, not an indication of the sentence that would be imposed in this case. Sentencing following a conviction depends on factors including the degree of violence, injuries, value of property, criminal record, circumstances of the offence and mitigating or aggravating factors.

Mischief under $5,000

Mischief is defined under Section 430 of the Criminal Code and can include deliberately damaging or destroying property, making property dangerous or ineffective, or interfering with its lawful use.

Where the property involved is valued at $5,000 or less, the charge is a hybrid offence.

If the Crown proceeds by indictment, the maximum sentence is two years in prison. If prosecuted summarily, the general Criminal Code maximum is two years less a day in jail, a fine of up to $5,000, or both.

Depending on the circumstances and an offender’s record, courts can consider a range of sentencing options for property offences, from community-based penalties to incarceration.

What is forcible entry?

Forcible entry is addressed under Sections 72 and 73 of the Criminal Code.

Section 72 defines the offence as entering real property that is in the actual and peaceful possession of another person in a manner likely to cause a breach of the peace, or a reasonable fear that such a breach will occur. Whether the person otherwise had a right to enter the property is not determinative under the section.

Forcible entry is also a hybrid offence.

If prosecuted by indictment, it carries a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment. If the Crown proceeds summarily, the general maximum is two years less a day, a fine of up to $5,000, or both.

Failure to comply with a release order

Section 145(5) of the Criminal Code applies when a person who is at large on a release order allegedly fails, without lawful excuse, to follow a condition of that order other than the requirement to attend court.

The police release does not specify which condition Smith is alleged to have breached.

The offence is hybrid. If prosecuted by indictment, the maximum sentence is two years imprisonment. Summary proceedings can carry up to two years less a day in jail, a fine of up to $5,000, or both.

A breach allegation can also become relevant to future decisions about whether an accused should be detained or released while other charges remain before the courts. Those decisions are made by the court based on the circumstances before it.

Case remains before the courts

The charges remain allegations and the Crown will be required to prove each offence beyond a reasonable doubt if the case proceeds to trial.

The fact an accused has been remanded in custody should not be interpreted as evidence that the charges have been proven.

Smith is presumed innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law.