An application from a man convicted in a 2017 murder to change the terms of his life sentence has been denied by the Alberta Court of Appeal.
Tewodros Mulugeta Kebede and Yu Chieh Liao were convicted of first-degree murder in the killing of Hanock Afowerk but the appeal court later substituted those for second-degree murder convictions.
- Sign up for breaking news alerts from CTV News, right at your fingertips
- The information you need to know, sent directly to you: Download the CTV News App
Under the latest application, Kebede sought to alter his parole ineligibility from 17 years to 15 years, with his counsel saying the sentencing judge’s findings of fact were “based on speculation” and could not have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
In its decision, the panel denied Kebede’s appeal, saying the sentencing judge imposed a period well within the range of 12 to 22 years and “properly and thoughtfully applied the principle of parity in this case.”
On July 9, 2017, Kebede, Liao and several others took Afowerk to an autobody shop in Calgary.
The court said over the course of several hours, the group confined, extorted, beat and eventually killed the victim.
Afowerk’s body was dumped west of Calgary.
Kebede was arrested on July 19, 2017, after he and Liao “took measures to hide their involvement” in the killing that included scouring the interior of a rental vehicle clean and burning several unknown items in a field.
In his application, Kebede’s lawyer A.L. Serink argued that he should not have received a different period of parole ineligibility than the co-accused Liao, who was given a 14-year duration before being allowed to apply for parole.
The defence said the sentencing judge committed an error in principle and did not adequately prove that certain facts were aggravating.
“(Kebede) says the evidence of the text messages in support of planning the offence did not involve him, therefore his culpability should not have increased on the basis he participated in the planning,” the court said.
Serink also claimed Kebede was unfairly tied to the firearm used to kill Afowerk and his prior minor criminal record “should not have significantly aggravated his parole ineligibility.”
While the Court of Appeal agreed that the Crown did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Kebede was in possession of the murder weapon, it did prove, through witness testimony, that he was in possession of a firearm.
“We do not agree the sentencing judge fell into reviewable error in his findings regarding Kebede’s involvement in the luring, confinement and extortion, which required planning; or his culpability for the infliction of the injuries arising from Afowerk’s confinement, beating, strangulation and shooting,” the appeal court said.
The court added the sentencing judge also did not make a mistake when referring to Kebede’s previous criminal record.
“He carefully reviewed Kebede’s prior criminal record and clearly distinguished between the youth and adult convictions when assigning it weight,” the court said.
“He found that Kebede’s adult convictions, and to a lesser extent, youth convictions, indicated a potential risk of future dangerous conduct.
“Future dangerousness, and therefore protection of the public, is an important consideration when setting parole ineligibility periods.”
The appeal court added that that criminal record, which included convictions and sentences for lesser offences, did not deter him from “increasingly violent” acts.
