Skip to content

Court dismisses appeal from then-drug dealer caught on Sea to Sky Highway

Man caught two times for offences related to marijuana trafficking believed sentence focused too little on goal of rehabilitation
pix

It’s not just ski gear being carried through the corridor.

The courts have dismissed a recent appeal from a man who was convictedof offences related to unlawfully possessing and selling marijuana on two occasions in 2012.

A written copy of the oral reasons for judgment from Justice Fitch of the B.C. Court of Appeal states that while an error was made during the sentencing of Tarek Hady Lotfy, the mistake had no impact on the sentence.

Fitch also ruled against Lotfy’s claim that there was an error in principle with respect to his sentence, as it allegedly focused too much on general deterrence and denunciation, while giving too little focus on the goal of rehabilitation.

The document, which was released last month, states Lotfy was arrested on July 5, 2012, a day that he sold 10 pounds of marijuana for $23,455.

He was arrested and released.

In Dec. 5, 2012, he was stopped for speeding between Whistler and Squamish. Police found that he was in possession of 22 pounds of marijuana, valued at $33,750.

The court found that Lotfy’s July offence warranted four months in custody, while his December offence deserved 12 months.

However, when the court took into account that he’d be serving multiple consecutive sentences, authorities ruled in favour of sentencing him to a “global sentence” of 14 months for both violations altogether.

“The overriding factor against a higher sentence is the strong effort Mr. Lotfy has made and continues to make in distancing himself from his conduct in 2012,” reads a record of the ruling made in 2016.

In last month’s appeal decision, Fitch stated that he disagrees with Lotfy’s assertion that the sentence was given with excessive emphasis on deterrence and denunciation.

He also noted that Lotfy made the December offence “just 15 days after his first court appearance on the July matter.”

“I am unable to accept the appellant’s contention that the sentencing judge failed to exercise restraint,” said Fitch. “The appellant made a clear-eyed determination to engage in the offence of possessing a relatively large quantity of marihuana [sic] for the purpose of trafficking when he was already before the courts charged with a similar offence.”

According to the document, Lotfy believed the sentence was unfairly influenced because the sentencing judge erroneously believed that Lotfy was on bail in relation to the July offence when he committed the December offence.

It was found that Lotfy wasn’t on bail, but rather subject to a summons to appear in court.

However, Fitch said that this detail did not influence the sentence Lotfy received.

“The [sentencing] judge’s misapprehension as to whether the appellant was on judicial interim release [bail] in relation to the first offence when the second was committed had no real effect on the sentence,” he said.

“The important point is that the appellant committed a similar offence after being arrested in July.”

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks