PWR Health Consultants, Inc.


Case Summaries

R. v. XXX, File No: 241260-1

Reasons for Sentence, Galati, PCJ

Provincial Court of British Columbia, August 24, 2017

Charge(s):  S. 334(a) CCC – theft over $5,000

Anticipated Sentence: Incarceration in the range of “high provincial time to low federal time” – 18 months to 3 years

Sentence Order: Conditional sentence order of two years less a day with mandatory conditions as well as continuing medical treatment, community work service and full restitution. 


In directing a conditional sentence, Galati, PCJ relied on Dickson, 2007 BCCA 561, para 70

“It cannot be necessary in the interests of general deterrence for serious theft, to incarcerate someone who is mentally ill when the offences were committed, whose mental illness was a cause of her committing the offences, who pleads guilty, who makes restitution, and who undertakes an appropriate course of medical treatment.”

As of April 2018, the patient is compliant with the sentencing conditions, remains in treatment and continues to do well.  


Ban on Publication pursuant to s. 486.4 CCC

R. v. I.C.

Proceedings at Guilty Plea, Justice B.

Ontario Court of Justice, Fall 2015

Charge(s): S. 162(1)(a) CCC  (3 counts); S. 163.1(2) CCC (3 counts); S 163.1(4) CCC (1 count)

Possible Sentence:  Sentencing is largely discretionary but the maximum for these offences can be in the range of 10 to 14 years. In this case, a joint submission was entered for a global sentence of three years imprisonment with conditions that the accused provide a DNA sample to the DNA databank and register under the Federal Sex Offender Registry.

Sentence:  Justice B. accepted the joint submission.  See details of the sentencing order in the body of the case summary. The offender served 19 months; released on full parole.

Reasons for Decision: General deterrence is noted as the judge’s primary concern: “In this case, the reports which have been filed on behalf of Mr. C, indicate to me that specific deterrence is less of a factor in this particular case, as it is clear that he has aggressively dealt with his behaviour in attempting to change it in the future.”

Justice B. noted: “Dr. Doupe explains that the therapy in question address[es] the problem at many levels, including both protection of society and reducing risks by providing tools and skills, thereby lowering his risk to re-offend.

Dr. Doupe’s Comments: “The patient is still in therapy and continues to appreciate that the ability to access proper care came about as a result of the arrest.”  

The offender was released in spring 2017 on full parole and continues in therapy as of January 2018.