 |
| John L. Hill |
The report states that Ontario Superior Court Justice Andrew Goodman was publicly reprimanded and ordered to apologize after mistakenly sentencing Peter Khill to eight years in prison for manslaughter — two years longer than intended. Goodman admitted over a year later that he had meant to impose a six-year sentence but accidentally read from the wrong version of his decision after Khill’s high-profile case involving the 2016 shooting death of Jonathan Styres, a 29-year-old father from Six Nations.
The Canadian Judicial Council criticized Goodman’s extended silence as a significant ethical breach and a risk to public confidence in the judiciary, although they did not remove him from office. Despite apologizing, the panel concluded that Goodman still did not fully understand the severity of his delay.
Goodman initially chose not to correct his mistake after consulting with colleagues, who stated that the eight-year sentence was still legally valid. He only disclosed the error in August 2024, during Khill’s appeal.
Although the Court of Appeal later reduced Khill’s sentence to six years, and no additional prison time was served, the panel emphasized the psychological impact of the original sentence. It noted that an appeal might have been avoided if the error had been corrected immediately.
The Supreme Court of Canada recently refused to hear Khill’s final appeal, thus concluding the legal proceedings.
The Ontario Court of Appeal noted that on Aug. 12, 2024, 14 months after the sentence was imposed and just over a couple of months before the scheduled appeal, the trial judge sent a letter to the associate chief justice of Ontario. In this letter, the trial judge stated that although he had imposed an eight-year prison term, he actually intended a six-year sentence. This letter was admitted as fresh evidence with the parties' consent (R. v. Khill, 2025 ONCA 146).
The appeal court reasoned that Justice Goodman was not functus officio when he recognized that he had imposed the wrong sentence. Nor was he functus officio after the sentencing period when he sought advice from others on how to correct his mistake.
The appeal judgment addressed the scope of the functus officio doctrine and its application to this case. The doctrine allows for the correction of judicial errors when: (1) no reconsideration of a judicial decision is needed, and the court’s intention is clear enough that the correction aligns with that intention; and (2) the correction does not raise a reasonable concern of bias or taint, nor does it cause unfairness to the offender. See R. v. Krouglov, 2017 ONCA 197; R. v. Malicia, 82 O.R. (3d) 772; and R. v. Hasiu, 2018 ONCA 24, at paras. 35-38. It was up to the judge to take corrective action and not the responsibility of his colleagues to render advice.
What neither the Court of Appeal nor the judicial council considered was the impact on the offender if the correct sentence had been handed down or corrected immediately. Parole eligibility allows a prisoner to apply for full parole after serving one-third of the sentence. Day parole eligibility is six months before the full parole eligibility date. Before applying for day or full parole, an offender will typically attempt to demonstrate their ability to remain a manageable risk in the community by applying for escorted temporary absences, followed by unescorted temporary absences. All of this takes months to co-ordinate and accomplish.
The uncorrected sentence, even though revealed, was late by 14 months and wasted precious time the inmate could have used in preparing a viable release plan.
Justice Goodman suffered no real damage for his error. Peter Khill must start late to regain his freedom. Like clients who are not warned by the law society of professional misfeasance by a solicitor and delays in investigating wrongdoing, these errors can lead only to mistrust in our judicial system.
John L. Hill practised and taught prison law until his retirement. He holds a J.D. from Queen’s and an LL.M. in constitutional law from Osgoode Hall. His most recent book, Acts of Darkness (Durvile & UpRoute Books) was released July 1. Hill is also the author of Pine Box Parole: Terry Fitzsimmons and the Quest to End Solitary Confinement (Durvile & UpRoute Books) and The Rest of the (True Crime) Story (AOS Publishing). Contact him at johnlornehill@hotmail.com.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.