Canada Judgment

Supreme Court of British Columbia

R. v. Gelowitz

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court accepted the jointly proposed sentence because the offences were serious but the accused demonstrated significant mitigation through family support and rehabilitative steps; the joint disposition (concurrent custodial terms resulting in 42 months new custody), ancillary orders including a 10‑year firearms prohibition under s.109, a DNA order under s.487.051(3), forfeiture of exhibits per Exhibit 2, and credit for two months and five days served, were within a reasonable range and appropriate to denounce and deter the conduct while recognizing rehabilitation prospects.

Court disposition

Guilty pleas accepted; sentence imposed in accordance with joint submission

Orders

  • Count 1: 30 months incarceration
  • Count 7: 42 months incarceration, concurrent
  • Count 8: 44 months plus 5 days incarceration, concurrent; credit for time served of 2 months and 5 days applied
  • Total new custody period: 42 months
  • 10‑year firearms prohibition under s.109 Criminal Code applicable to all counts
  • Order for DNA sample and registration under s.487.051(3) Criminal Code applicable to all counts
  • Forfeiture and disposal of exhibits directed in accordance with Exhibit 2
  • Stay of proceedings on the remaining counts

02

Material facts

Parties

Regina

Crown Counsel: A.G. Varesi

Dominic David Joseph Gelowitz

Accused Counsel: P.M. McGowan

Amounts and remedies

  • Total Sentence Months: 42
  • Firearms Prohibition Years: 10
  • Credit Time Served Days: 65

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal Indictment / Sentencing Hearing (oral Reasons; Joint Submission)

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Crown sought acceptance of a joint sentencing submission specifying custodial terms (30, 42 and 44 months plus five days on respective counts, to run concurrently for a total of 42 months new custody), requested a 10‑year firearms prohibition under s.109, a DNA order under s.487.051(3), forfeiture and disposal of exhibits as set out in Exhibit 2, and a stay of proceedings on remaining counts.
Respondent
Defence supported the joint submission and emphasized mitigating factors: the accused's supportive family, evidence of rehabilitation efforts including education and employment since release on charge, and the accused's promise and prospects; urged acceptance of the joint recommendation.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Criminal sentencing jurisprudence and statutory purpose of sentencing

    Sentencing must reflect denunciation and deterrence for serious offences

  2. 02

    Common law principle regarding joint submissions (sentencing jurisprudence)

    Courts may accept a joint submission on sentence where it is within a reasonable range and justified by mitigation

  3. 03

    Criminal Code, s.109

    Firearms prohibition may be imposed under s.109 of the Criminal Code

  4. 04

    Criminal Code, s.487.051(3)

    Court may order collection and registration of DNA samples under s.487.051(3) of the Criminal Code

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court accepted the jointly proposed sentence because the offences were serious but the accused demonstrated significant mitigation through family support and rehabilitative steps; the joint disposition (concurrent custodial terms resulting in 42 months new custody), ancillary orders including a 10‑year firearms prohibition under s.109, a DNA order under s.487.051(3), forfeiture of exhibits per Exhibit 2, and credit for two months and five days served, were within a reasonable range and appropriate to denounce and deter the conduct while recognizing rehabilitation prospects.

Obiter and limits

  • The offences involving firearms and cocaine trafficking impose significant harm on society and warrant denunciation and deterrence
  • The accused has demonstrated promise through education and employment and must not squander the rehabilitative opportunity

Court disposition

Guilty pleas accepted; sentence imposed in accordance with joint submission

  • Count 1: 30 months incarceration
  • Count 7: 42 months incarceration, concurrent
  • Count 8: 44 months plus 5 days incarceration, concurrent; credit for time served of 2 months and 5 days applied
  • Total new custody period: 42 months
  • 10‑year firearms prohibition under s.109 Criminal Code applicable to all counts
  • Order for DNA sample and registration under s.487.051(3) Criminal Code applicable to all counts
  • Forfeiture and disposal of exhibits directed in accordance with Exhibit 2
  • Stay of proceedings on the remaining counts

Source and reliance status

Supreme Court of British Columbia · 6 May 2019

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Judgment· 6 May 2019

2019 BCSC 914

2019 BCSC 914 R. v. Gelowitz

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: R. v. Gelowitz, 2019 BCSC 914 Date: 20190506 Docket: 33201-3 Registry: Williams Lake Regina v. Dominic David Joseph Gelowitz Before: The Honourable Mr. Justice Hori Oral Reasons for Sentence Counsel for the Crown: A.G. Varesi Counsel for the Defence: P.M. McGowan Place and Date of Hearing: Williams Lake, B.C. May 6, 2019 Place and Date of Judgment: Williams Lake, B.C. May 6, 2019 [1] THE COURT: I understand that on January 29, 2019, Mr. Gelowitz entered guilty pleas to Counts 1, 7, and 8 of the indictment. I have heard submissions this afternoon on a joint submission for sentencing. [2] The offences to which Mr. Gelowitz has pled guilty are very serious offences. They involve the possession of firearms and they involve the possession of cocaine for the purposes of trafficking. These offences, as we all know in this day and age, impose an extreme amount of hardship and difficulty on society as a whole. So I must say that the offences for which you have pled guilty are very serious and we must take steps to deter and denounce that kind of behaviour in our society. [3] However, I have heard submissions on your behalf and read the letters of support that your counsel has provided to the court showing that you have a very supportive and loving family behind you and that they are in a position to support you going forward. I am also

struck by the steps that you have taken to start your rehabilitative process, in terms of your education and in terms of your employment, since being released after being charged. You appear to have, based on what I have heard, a great deal of promise, and you must not squander that. [4] Based upon the submissions that I have heard, I am prepared to accept the joint submission on sentencing. So, in particular, the sentence to be imposed upon you, Mr. Gelowitz, is: a) on Count 1 - 30 months of jail time; b) on Count 7 - 42 months' jail time, concurrent; and c) on Count 8 - 44 months, plus five days jail, less credit for time served of two months and five days, concurrent. [5] I have not done the math, Mr. Varesi, but I understand that that totals 42 months of new time -- [6] MR. VARESI: Yes. [7] THE COURT: -- for all three counts? [8] MR. VARESI: Yes. [9] THE COURT: In addition, there will be a 10‑year firearms prohibition under s. 109 of the Criminal Code, and there will be an order for a DNA sample and registration under 487.051(3) of the Criminal Code. [10] Is there anything else? [11] MR. VARESI: Yes. Crown directs a stay of proceedings on the remaining counts. And, My Lord, in terms of forfeiture by agreement, what I've done is I've typed up how the exhibits are to be disposed of. So if this could be marked as the next document on sentencing, and I'd just ask Your Lordship

to endorse it, and I'll prepare the order and forward it in due course. So if I may approach the -- [12] THE COURT: Yes. [13] MR. VARESI: -- Madam Registrar? [14] THE COURT: So mark that Exhibit 2? [15] MR. VARESI: Yes, please. EXHIBIT 2 ON SENTENCE - Forfeiture Order re Indictment 33201-3. [16] THE CLERK: My Lord, with respect to the 10‑year prohibition and DNA, can I clarify with the court which counts those prohibitions apply to? [17] THE COURT: Mr. Varesi? [18] MR. VARESI: To all -- all counts . . . [inaudible]. [19] THE COURT: All counts -- [20] MR. VARESI: They're all -- they all attract the firearms ban -- [21] THE COURT: Yes. [22] MR. VARESI: -- and DNA. Thank you. [23] THE COURT: So, Mr. Varesi, you would like me to endorse this forfeiture order? [24] MR. VARESI: Yes, My Lord, and -- [25] THE COURT: Mr. McGowan, any issue with that? [26] MR. MCGOWAN: No, we -- my friend and I have discussed this and this is being jointly proposed. [27] MR. VARESI: Yes, Your Lordship can simply indicate that the exhibits are to be disposed of as outlined in the -- [28] MR. MCGOWAN: Exhibit 2. [29] MR. VARESI: -- Exhibit 2. [30] THE COURT: Let us do that. I will direct that the exhibits be disposed of in accordance with Exhibit 2. [31] MR. VARESI: Yes. [32] MR. MCGOWAN: Yes. Mr. Varesi can then prepare a formal order. [33] THE COURT: Yes. [34] MR. VARESI: Thank you. That's everything,

from the Crown's perspective, My Lord. [35] THE COURT: And do you need anything from me in terms of the stays on the others? [36] MR. VARESI: No, the -- no, it was stayed on the record, so . . . [37] THE COURT: All right. [38] MR. VARESI: Thank you. [39] MR. MCGOWAN: Thank you, My Lord. [40] THE COURT: Thank you. That is it. [41] MR. VARESI: Thank you very much. [42] THE COURT: Thank you. [43] THE CLERK: Order in court. "Hori J."

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Criminal Code s.109

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Criminal Code s.487.051(3)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.