R. v. Mostowy

R. v. Mostowy

The sentencing judge must accept the jury's finding that the complainant was sufficiently credible and reliable to support a guilty verdict, but where the verdict is ambiguous as to the number of incidents the judge must make independent findings necessary for sentencing; applying s.724 and Sheppard, the Crown...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2025 BCSC 2121
Parties
Prosecution: Rex (Crown); Accused: Kyle Christopher Mostowy (also known as Kyle Christopher Motowy)
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Assault / Post Verdict Sentencing Fact Finding (s.724 Criminal Code)
Outcome
Jury conviction stands; sentencing fact-finding: court finds beyond a reasonable doubt that two separate incidents of sexual assault occurred; matter adjourned to fix sentencing arrangements.
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Section 724 Criminal Code Fact Finding, Credibility and Reliability of Complainant, Aggravating Factors Pattern of Conduct, Precedent: R. V. Sheppard; R. V. Ferguson
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Sentencing Evidence Sexual Assault Section 724 Criminal Code Fact Finding Credibility and Reliability of Complainant Aggravating Factors Pattern of Conduct Precedent: R. V. Sheppard; R. V. Ferguson

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex (Crown)

Prosecution

Kyle Christopher Mostowy (also known as Kyle Christopher Motowy)

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Assault / Post Verdict Sentencing Fact Finding (s.724 Criminal Code)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether multiple instances of sexual assault were proven for sentencing purposes
  2. 2 How s.724 binds the sentencing judge to jury's express or implied factual findings
  3. 3 Standard of proof for aggravating facts at sentencing (balance of probabilities vs beyond reasonable doubt)

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge must accept the jury's finding that the complainant was sufficiently credible and reliable to support a guilty verdict, but where the verdict is ambiguous as to the number of incidents the judge must make independent findings necessary for sentencing; applying s.724 and Sheppard, the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused sexually assaulted the complainant on more than one occasion and the evidence supports a factual finding of two occasions involving grabbing of breasts and touching of crotch or buttocks, but the evidence is insufficiently clear to find more than two incidents or to attribute multiple incidents to specific worksites beyond...

Court Disposition

Jury conviction stands; sentencing fact-finding: court finds beyond a reasonable doubt that two separate incidents of sexual assault occurred; matter adjourned to fix sentencing arrangements.

Orders

  • Court finds beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused sexually assaulted the complainant on two occasions by grabbing her breasts and touching her crotch or buttocks
  • Adjourned to October 22, 2025 at 2:00 p.m. to fix a date for sentencing and to address reports