Yarmouth County man sentenced for shooting incident

A Yarmouth County man has been sentenced for a shooting incident four years ago that resulted in the amputation of another man’s leg, forever changing the victim’s life.

The incident occurred at a home in Pembroke, Yarmouth County, in November 2017. At that time Nicolas Ashton Mullen, now 36, was charged with attempted murder, careless use of a firearm, pointing a firearm and discharging a firearm with intent.

In Yarmouth Supreme

Court on Sept. 27, Mullen was sentenced on two charges he had pled guilty to: careless use of a firearm and unsafe storage of multiple firearms.

The maximum penalty for these charges is two years imprisonment. There is no minimum penalty. The court did not proceed with the other charges.

An agreed statement of facts laid out the circumstances of the incident. It stated that Mullen and two other friends were at the Pembroke residence. Following an argument between Mullen and one of the men, Mullen discharged a rifle into the floor of the residence in front of the two men.

When the man Mullen had argued with left the home, Mullen followed him.

“The accused left the residence through the front door while carrying the rifle, in order to continue the confrontation,” Justice Pierre Muise said in summarizing the incident. He said in the driveway the victim picked up a rake to defend himself. A single shot was discharged from the firearm carried by Mullen, striking the man in the leg.

The gunshot resulted in serious injury. The man’s left leg had to be amputated at the hip, the court was told.

After the shooting, six firearms and ammunition – all unsecured – were seized from the house.

The Crown and defence differed on an appropriate sentence. The Crown recommended an overall sentence of 18 months imprisonment; which took into account the time Mullen spent early on in remand in pre-sentence custody, which, the court was told, was roughly the equivalent of six months

The defence sought a suspended sentence plus probation. Failing that, it asked for a short conditional sentence served in the community or, as a last resort, a short intermittent sentence if a custodial sentence was handed down.

Mullen was described by his lawyer, as well as by the presentence report, as someone not apt to be in trouble with the law again. It was noted there had been no issues since the incident four years ago and any record he had was dated and unrelated to these types of charges. He has a family and for the past six years has run a refrigeration and air conditioning business that employs two other people, the court was told.

There was no victim impact statement filed with the court, although the victim was interviewed for the pre-sentence report.

“The message conveyed by the victim, according to the writer of the pre-sentence report, is while though the event drastically changed his life overnight, in his words, all is forgiven,” Justice Muise said, saying this demonstrated “a strength of character and positivity,” by the victim.

But it by no means lessened the impact of what had happened to the victim, noted Muise and the Crown in their remarks.

“He gives a very positive outlook on how he tries not to dwell on what happened … (and) is trying to move forward,” Crown attorney Robert Morrison said. “I’ve certainly had those discussions with (him), but I’ve had discussions with him where he has become quite emotional and upset. It is clear this has had significant impact on him both emotionally and psychologically.”

The Crown said the man’s injury has left him unable to work in his chosen field.

There is also a civil case in relation to this incident.

Justice Muise said Mullen’s disregard for the safe storage of firearms created a risk of harm and the fact that Mullen was impaired by alcohol elevated that risk.

“Firing (the rifle) in the floor with another person present, placed them at immediate and significant risk of harm,” said Muise, adding that by pursuing the victim outside with the loaded firearm, “in that highly charged atmosphere there was an extreme risk of harm.”

Mullen’s lawyer Phil Star told the court his client is remorseful and accepts full responsibility for what took place. The pre-sentence report stated Mullen is not considered a risk to the community and that he had adhered to the strict bail conditions imposed years ago.

Star told the court it has no reason to be concerned about his client in the future. He has strong family ties and employment ties, he said. He accepts responsibility and until this incident his client had led, in Star’s words, “a relatively ordinary, uneventful life.”

Star agreed the act before the court was very serious; yet while wrong, he said it had not been premeditated.

“We clearly don’t have the worst offender and the Crown, in fairness, has not seen fit to suggest that,” said Star.

Justice Muise sentenced Mullen to 18 months imprisonment for careless use of a firearm with a 30-day concurrent sentence for the unsafe storage charge. He deducted the credited amount of time Mullen spent in remand, leaving a sentence of 354 days.

Muise determined the sentence could be served in the community under house arrest and court conditions. The conditional sentence will also be followed by a period of probation.

“The event, in this case, was the tragic consequence of a perfect storm circumstance,” Muise said in handing down his sentence.

“There is no indication of (past) failure to comply. He has significant business and family responsibilities,” said Muise about Mullen, noting he is now prohibited from owning or possessing firearms for 10 years by the court. “I am satisfied … that he would not endanger the safety of the community.”