A Yukon judge has approved a modification to a man’s sentence which allows him to travel to Ontario for his first cousin’s wedding.

Judge Karen Ruddy issued her written reasons last Friday.

Murray Lloyd Kuhl was convicted of impaired driving causing bodily harm last March 13 by Judge Michael Cozens.

This was the result of an incident at a downtown parking lot on Oct. 29, 2016.

June Mather was struck by Kuhl’s vehicle at the exit of the parking lot. Kuhl was entering the parking lot through the designated exit.

Mather was left with a “significant injury to her left knee” and less serious injuries.

Last June 25, Cozens sentenced Kuhl to 90 days’ imprisonment served on weekends.

This meant Kuhl would have to report to the Whitehorse Correctional Centre (WCC) at 7 p.m. on Fridays and would be released at 7 a.m. the following Mondays.

On Aug. 10, Kuhl filed an application to deviate from this schedule for the Labour Day weekend, enabling him to travel to Ontario for the Sept. 1 wedding.

He asked to not have to report to WCC between Aug. 31 and Sept. 3.

Kuhl also made a request to have the hours changed. He asked to the court to approve him checking in at 6 p.m. on Fridays and released at 6 a.m. on Mondays.

He wanted the change because he is a substitute teacher, and opportunities become available as early as 6:15 a.m. every school day.

His lawyer, Amy Steele, argued his case on Aug. 15 before Ruddy.

During that hearing, Crown prosecutor Leo Lane argued that the court does not have the power to amend an intermittent sentence. The Crown was not opposed to changing the times, but opposed freeing him for the requested weekend.

The Crown argued that any sentencing provision regarding preserving family relationships should only apply to immediate family, not a first cousin. He added that a sentence should “pinch.”

In her written decision, Ruddy explained that there is no authority in the Canadian Criminal Code to vary an intermittent sentence.

She said the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that intermittent sentences could be modified when the offenders’ circumstances change. She added that not being able to modify an intermittent sentence would go against its principle.

“It is equally absurd to think that Parliament would intend that intermittent sentences only reflect circumstances known at the time of sentencing, and cannot be adjusted to reflect changes in circumstances when changes are unforeseeable and beyond the offender’s control,” she said.

With that, Ruddy determined that the court does have the jurisdiction to amend Kuhl’s sentence. She first focused on the change in hours.

She explained that the Supreme Court ruled changes could be made to accommodate the offender’s employment.

Ruddy was advised that Kuhl’s first cousin was his best friend when he was growing up. She added that he does have a supporting family but most live in Ontario, with none residing in the Yukon.

She felt the provision for preserving family relations should extend beyond immediate family.

“Any familial relationships that are supportive and positive in nature enhance the objective or rehabilitation and should be encouraged,” she said in her decision.

The judge said this would give Kuhl the chance to reconnect with his family, indicating she did not see how this would undermine his sentence.

Ruddy added this would not change the amount of time he would have to serve, but just extend his sentence by one weekend.

She concluded by saying that had the wedding been known when sentencing took place, Cozens would have most likely factored this into his sentencing.