The sentence for a man who was driving drunk in a fatal crash in Regina has been hiked up from 30 months to four-and-a-half years.
Maninder Kang was sentenced in early 2014 for several charges related to a crash in 2007.
According to court documents Kang, 18 years old at the time, was drunk and high while driving on the night in question. He was going 105 km/h on Victoria Avenue, which has a speed limit of 70 km/h, and ended up crashing into the back of a semi that was stopped at a red light.
Kang then drove off, parked in a residential area, and tried to tell the 911 operator that his car had been stolen.
There were three people in the car with Kang. One man, Sukhminder Singh Khuber, 26, ended up dying from his injuries. The girls in the car were seriously hurt.
A year later Kang was arrested and charged. In 2014, he was found guilty of the charges and sentenced.
Originally Kang was given the following sentences for his charges:
- 27 months for impaired driving causing death
- 18 months each for both impaired driving causing bodily harm charges, to be served concurrently with the impaired driving causing death charge
- Three months for failing to stop at the scene of an accident, to be served consecutively
- $1,000 fine for failing to provide a breath sample
The Crown appealed the sentence, arguing that it didn’t reflect the gravity of the crimes, or Kang’s “degree of moral culpability.”
In her written decision, Justice Whitmore said the sentencing judge put too much emphasis on Kang’s effort to turn his life around, and not enough on denunciation and deterance, as well as a sentence appropriate to the seriousness of the crime.
The sentence for impaired driving causing death was increased to three years. The sentence for leaving the scene of an crash was raised to one year to served consecutively and the sentence for refusing to provide a breath sample was raised to six months. The sentences for impaired driving causing bodily harm weren’t appealed.
Whitmore called Kang’s conduct appalling and unconscionable in his decision.
“When one considers the serious consequences of his horrendous driving, his attempts to avoid liability and callous disregard for his passenger’s health, and the principles of denunciation and deterrence, a 4.5 year sentence is appropriate and does not offend the principle of totality,” he wrote.