Chapter 4 - Interpretation of Criminal Statutes

Question 1

When 2 readings of the same statute are possible, this will occur

Answer 1

The one that is most favourable to the defendant will be implemented

Question 2

Describe the 4 steps that a court will take to discern the meaning of legislation

Answer 2

1st modern principles of interpretation: the words of an Act are to be read in their context and their grammatical nad ordinary sense to discern the scheme of Parliament
2nd if that doesn’t work then if one version of the Code raises an ambiguity, look to the other official language version
3rd if there is still ambiguity look to resovle via applying Charter Values
4th if stiull uncelar, apply strict construction rule: the one most favorable to the accused

Question 3

In order for the standard of BRD to be proved, this must occur in order to convict

Answer 3

: if the jury is staisfed beyond a reasonable doubt that all essesnai lelements have been proven

Question 4

What will result in an acquittal?

Answer 4

Any reasonable doubt of guilt

Question 5

This case established the steps that must be taken to interpret legislation

Answer 5

Application Under S. 83.28 of the Criminal Code, Re

Question 6

R. v. Clark established that

Answer 6

Parliemtn is deemed to act deliberately. If it was the intent of Parliament to include something, they would have done so.

It is inappropriate for Court to do what Parliament did not.

Question 7

This case established that only in cases of genuine ambiguity will the legislation be ready the manner most favourable to the accused

Answer 7

R. v. Goulis

Question 8

What was the ratio of R v. Pare?

Answer 8

While the doctrine of strict construction is appropriate in most cases relating to ambiguous legislation, it is not appropriate when such an interpretation would lead to rulings that are arbitrary, nonsensical, or would malign the intent of parliament.

Question 9

This is the exception to interpreting legislation in the manner most favourable to the accused, in the case of genuine ambiguity

Answer 9

When that interpretation runs counter to common sense (R v. Pare)

Question 10

This case established that both language version of legislation are equally binding

Answer 10

R. v. Mac

Question 11

Reverse onus is when ___ and has been deemed to be ___ in criminal cases

Answer 11

the accused must present their own defence or be charged, it is held tone unconstitutional

Question 12

Which case established the rule with regards to reverse onus?

Answer 12

Woolmington v. D.P.P.

Question 13

BRD means

Answer 13

Slightly less than absolute certainty, much more than the balance of probabilities

Question 14

This case defined the spectrum of what BRD is

Answer 14

R. v. Lifchus

Question 15

Explain the 3 deliberations that a jury much go through when they are weighing testimony and evidence

Answer 15

1st if you belive the the evidence of the accused = acquit
2nd if you do not belive the testimony of the accused but are still left in reasonable doubt = acquit
3rd even if not left in doubt by the evidence of the accused, based on the evidence, you must be BRD to convict

Question 16

Which case established that lack of credibility on the party of the accused does not equate to proof of guilt?

Answer 16

R. v. S. (J.H.)

Question 17

True or false, there are 2 kinds of acquittals in Canada

Answer 17

False. There is only the finding of not guilty. There is no ruling of factually innocent

Question 18

What was the ratio of R. v. Oakes?

Answer 18

An offence/statute may not presume a fact that places a burden of proof upon the accused as it assumes guilt, and shifts the onus onto the accused.

Question 19

The right to be presumed innocent BRD is established under…

Answer 19

Sec 11d

Question 20

Sec 11d mandates these 3 things

Answer 20

1. An individual must be proven innocent BRD
2. The state must bear the burden of proof
3. Criminal prosecutions must be carred out in accordance with lawful proceadures and fairness

Question 21

Which case established that “The presumpction of innocence is infringed whenever the accused is liable to be convicted dispire the existence of reasonable doubt”

Answer 21

R. v. Downey

Question 22

This exception will lead to a presumption of guilt in accordance with sec11d

Answer 22

If one fact leads inexorably to another (R v Downey)