test 2 Flashcards
With the exception of Nunavut, there are
four levels of courts that deal with criminal cases
- provincial/territorial courts
- provincial/territorial superior courts
- provincial appellate courts
- the Supreme Court of Canada
the courts are responsible for determining
- guilt or innocence of accused persons
- an appropriate sentence for those who are convicted, and
- that the rights of accused persons are protected
The principle of judicial independence is viewed as
being essential to the proper functioning of the courts
The Four Levels of courts in Manitoba
Supreme Court of Canada
Provincial Superior Court (Appeals) - MB court of appeal
Provincial Superior Court (trial)- Court of Queen’s Bench of MB
Provincial Court
Problem-solving courts
specialized courts that are designed to divert offenders with special needs from the criminal justice system
three defining attributes of problem-solving courts are
1) a focus on addressing the underlying problems of offenders, victims and communities
2) interagency and interdisciplinary collaboration; and
3) accountability to the community
Traditional court accountability
- use of resources within the court system (probation officers)
- impersonal, procedural
- little involvement outside of the court (Case handled off by the judge, no further involvement)
- focus on processing cases through the system
- focus on adjudicating
- communication through lawyers
Problem-solving accountability
- collarboration with professionals outside of the court system (drug treatment staff, victim services, employment programs)
- personal, individualized
- involvement outside of the court (monitoring continued supervision)
- focus on effectiveness of methods (evaluating court effectiveness and if outcomes are being reached)
- focus on problem-solving
- judge communicates directly with “client”
The intent of these problem-solving courts is to
shift from an adversarial or legalistic approach to one centred on treatment and rehabilitation
- focus is on addressing the underlying issues that contributed to criminal offending
- developing an intervention plan to address the behaviour as well as the circumstances that contributed to it
- also holding offenders responsible for their behaviour
specialized problem-solving courts incorporate the concept of
therapeutic justice
- an approach in problem-solving courts that uses the law and the courts authority as change agents to promote the health and well-beingof offenders, while ensuring that their legal rights are protected and that justice is done
offender participation in problem-solving courts is
voluntary
Mental Health Court (MHC)
- objective process
- outcomes
Objective/process
- reduce the crimilization of the mentally ill
- operate at pre and post charge stage
outcomes
- reduce reoffending by 10 to 75%
- can reduce the amount of time offenders spend in custody, increase access to treatment services and change life circumstances
Drug treatment court (DTC)
- objective/process
- outcomes
objective/process
- address alcohol/drug addiction of offenders and reduce reoffending
- treatment-oriented approach with specified conditions
outcomes
- may significantly reduce particpants drug use and criminal offending
- helps even offenders with length criminal records
Domestice violence court
- objective/process
- outcomes
objective/process
- stop the cycle of domestice violence
- assist victims, their families, and offenders
- reduce revictimization
outcomes
- effective in meeting its objectives
- a major challenge is high rate of non-completion
community wellness court
- objectives/process
- outcomes
objective/process
- address the needs of offenders with alcohol and drug problems, mental health issues and other underlying issues
outcomes
- effective in meeting its objectives
- a major challenge is high rate of non-completion
Indigenous courts
- section 718.2(e) of the criminal code requires judges to consider sentencing options other than incarceratoion, particularly for indigenous offenders
-the principle that the judiciary should make efforts to explore alternative sentencing options- including the use of restorative justice- was affirmed by the supreme court of canada R. v. Gladue 1999
gladue courts
- courts specifically for indigenous people
- gladue reports: historical impact statements
First nations communities are becoming increasingly
involved in developing community-based courts that are centred on traditional indigenous spirituality and cultural practices
the Tsuu T’ina Nation Peacemaker court is located
on the Tsuu Nation near calagary
- centred on peacemaking circles
- has an indigenous judge, crown prosecutor and court clerks
Indigenous peoples Court (Thunder Bay, Ontario)
- uses a restorative justice approach to sentencing
- draws upon indigenous culture and traditions
- helps persons who self-identify as First Nation, Indigenous, Inuit, or Metis and who are in conflict with the law
- elders play key role
- to qualify to appear in court, persons must plead guilty and accept responsibility for their offences
Circuit Courts
- in many northern and remote areas, judicial services are often provided via circuit courts
- circuit court parties, composed of a judge, a court clerk, a defence lawyer, a Crown counsel, and perhaps a translator, travel to communities (generally by plane) to hold court. Many communities are served regularly
- most of the communities are too small to have courthouses, and so the court is held in schools, community centres or other buildings that are available
The superior courts are the highest level of courts in a province/territory
- administered by provincial and terrirotiral governments
- superior court judges are appointed and paid by the federal government
- about 10% of criminals cases are heard in the superior courts
Superior courts generally have __ levels
trial: hears cases involving serious criminal offences
appeal: hears criminal and civil appeals
The supreme court of canada was established under
the constitution act 1867
- the governor in council appoints the nine judges of the supreme court
– selected from the major regions of the country; hpwever, three of the judges on the court must be from Quebec
– decisions of Supreme Court are finale and cannot be appealed
The supreme court receives hundreds of applications for cases to be considered, but grants only about
10%
- cases are heard by an odd number of judges - 5,7 or 9 to avoid ties
- cases often involve interpretations of the charter of rights and freedoms
- many cases are a leave to appeal the decision of a lower court
- a government asks the supreme court for a legal opinion on an important legal question, a process that is referred to as a reference or reference case.
courtroom workgroup
the criminal justice professionals, include the judge, crown counsel, and defence lawyer, present in the criminal court courtroom
- other professionals may appear on occasion (Expert witnesses)
- the advent of problem-solving courts has resulted in an expansion of the courtroom workgroup to include representatives from agences and community organizations; various restorative justice approaches include members of the community as well
The judge interprets
the law, assesses whether evidence can be admitted, rules on motions made by the Crown Counsel and defense lawyer and determines the truthfulness of evidence
- in most cases, this also includes making a decision on the guilt or innocence of the accused and passing sentence
- a key role of the judge is serving as a “gatekeeper” of evidence presented during the trial, including expert testimony
Justices of the peace play a variety of roles depending upon the jurisdiction
- issuing search warrants and conducting bails hearings
- presiding over hearings involving provincial/territory regulatory offences
- may also preside in small claims courts, work in court registries and handle court scheduling
the primary responsibility of the defence lawyer is to
ensure that the rights of the accused person are protected throughout the criminal justice process
- often actively involved in attempting to negotiate a plea for their client outside of the formal court process
- presents evidence and questions witnesses, experts, and others to build a case of innocence for the accused
- cross-examines witnesses for the prosecution and challenging the evidence that is presented by the crown
Duty counsel if often
provided as part of a provincial or territorial legal aid plan to ensure that persons who cannot afford to hire a private lawyer have representation
- first point of contact for a person who has been detained or arrested
- may also represent an accused in court
Crown counsel are
lawyers who represent the Crown (government) in court and who are responsible for prosecuting criminal cases
- provincially apointed crown attorneys prosecuting criminal code offences
- federally appointed crown attorneys prosecuting persons charged with violating other federal statutes, such as the controlled drugs and substances act
- carry out their tasks on behalf of the community
- responsible for laying charges against the accused in some provinces
Court Administrators
also known as court registrars or court clerks- perform a variety of administrative tasks
sheriffs support the court by
assisting in jury management, escorting accused and convicted persons, and providing security in the courtroom
judges at the provincial court level are appointed by
provincial governments
judges of the superior courts are appointed by the
federal government
Appointments are for
life. once on the bench, judges need not consider the career implications when making controversial decisions
provincial, territorial and federal court judges are guided by
ethical principles that set out in various provincial and territorial documents and, for federal appointed judges, by the Canadian Judicial Council
- centre on integrity in personal and professional conduct
- highlight impartiality and objectivity
- a duty to follow the law
- the importance of appropriate personal conduct
judicial independence
the notion that judges are not subject to pressure and influence and are free to make impartial decisions based solely on fact and law.
Case backlog and case delay are due to a number of factors, including
- a lack of judicial resources
- ineffective use of resources
- too few judges
- complexity of criminal cases
- inadequate case flow management
- efforts of defence counsel to lengthen the period of time that accused persons are confined prior to trial on remand
The ruling in the SCC cases R. v. Jordan (2016 SCC 27) redefined the constitutional right to a trail within a reasonable time
- prior to Jordan, judges could determine that case delay violated the constitutionally guaranteed right “to be tried within a reasonable time” under s.11(b) of the Charter and order a stay of proceedings or dismissal of the charges.
- Jordan set presumptive timelines for the disposition of cases in the courts from the time the person is charged to the actual or anticipated end of trial
– 18 months for cases tried in provincial court
– 30 months for cases in the superior court (or cases tried in the provincial court after a preliminary inquiry)
Summary Conviction
- generally, a less serious criminal offence; when the crown proceeds summarily, it is resolved in a provincial court.
- triable before a magistrate or judge and, on conviction, often has a default maximum penalty of a fine (not to exceed 5,000$) or 6 months in a provincial correctional facility or both
indictable offences
- generally, a more serious criminal offence
- may carry much longer maximum prison sentences; examples include murder, robbery, aggravated sexual assault q
Hybrid offences
- offences that can be proceeded summarily or by indictment- a decision that is always made by the Crown
The Criminal Code (R.S.C. 1985) Defines three categories of indictable offences
- offences under the absolute jurisdiction of provincial courts (s.553)
- offences under the absolute jurisdiction of superior courts (s.469)
- Electable offences- the right of the accused to choose level of court, judge vs. jury.
Section 469 of the Criminal code is
a list of serious offences that are non-electable offences.
- the list includes murder, treason, and piracy. these cases must be tried in a superior court
Section 553 of the criminal code lists
the less serious indictable offences (or hybrid offences where the crown proceeds by indictment) that are also non-electable
- the accused person has no choice but to be tried in a provincial or territorial court
- there are no jury trials in provinical court t
Most indictable offences are
electable offences and the accused person has three modes of trial from which to choose
1) trial by a provincial or territorial court judge
2) trial by a superior court judge sitting alone
3) trial by a superior court judge and a jury
The charter of rights and freedoms guarantees the right to a jury trial if
the alleged offence carries a maximum sentence of more than 5 years imprisonment
If an offence is a hybrid offence …
the crown chooses to proceed either summarily or by indictment
If an indictable offence is an electable indictable offence,
the accused chooses from the three possible modes of trial
Preliminary Hearing
- A hearing to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant a criminal trial
- This (usually) short hearing is held to determine whether there is a prima facie case
- for serious indictable offences
- all magistrate or provincial court judges listens to some (or all) of the Crown witnesses
- The judge does not rule on the guilt of the accused at the preliminary hearing, but must decide if the Crown has evidence that could be used to prove guilt
- in rare cases, the provincial attorney general can skip the preliminary hearing and go straight to trial called “preferring the indictment”
Section 11 of the Charter provides that “legal rights” are the right for every citizen
a) to be informed without unreasonable delay of the specific offence
b) to be tried within a reasonable time
c) not to be compelled to be a witness in proceedings against that person in respect of the offence
d) to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal
e) not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause
f) except in the case of an offence under military law tried before a military tribunal, to the benefit of trial by jury where the maximum punishment for the offence is imprisonment for 5 years or a more severe punishment
g) not to be found guilty on account of any act or omission unless, at the time of the act or omission, it constituted an offence under Canadian or International law or was criminal according to the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations
h) if finally acquitted of the offence, not to be tried for it again and, if finally found guilty and punished for the offence, not to be tried or punished for it again;
i) if found guilty of the offence and if the punishment for the offence has been varied between the time of the commission and the time of sentencing, to the benefit of the lesser punishment
Section 12 of the Charter
Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment
Section 13 of the Charter
- a witness who testifies in any proceedings has the right not to have any incriminating evidence so given used to incriminate that witness in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution of perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence
Section 14 of the Charter
A party or witness in any proceedings who does not understand or speak the language in which the proceedings are conducted or who is deaf has the right to the assistance of an interpreter
Laying an information
The police are usually responsible for laying an information
- it outlines the allegation that an individual contravened a criminal law
- a warrant for arrest or a summons to appear will be issued
Laying a charge
- the police and crown exercise great discretion to lay a charge
- charges are not laid in many cases
- the crown must approve before the police can lay a charge (BC, NB, QC)
Appearance notice
- appearance notice can be issued followed by the laying of an information
- sets out the details of the allegation against the accused person
- warns the accused that failure to appear in court is a criminal offence
Summons
- briefly states the allegation and directs the person to appear in court on a certain day
- summons is served on the accused, usually by a police officer
- accused may be charged criminally with failing to appear in court
Arrest
- police can arrest without a warrant and then lay the information
- release the accused from police custody or keep in custody
- presumption is that everyone will be released from police custody after arrest
Judicial Interim release (Bail)
- overseen by a JP or a superior court judge
- brought to court within 24 hours or as soon as is reasonably possible
- accused released or held in custody
- section 515 of Criminal code requires judges to release accused persons on bail unless crown can show why release should be denied
- Crown must show that detention until trial date is necessary at show cause hearing
- accused persons may also be asked to enter into a recognizance
Conditions of Bail
- the JP or judge decides to release the accused
- Young offenders may have to live with a guarantor
- statutory conditions- include reporting to a bail supervisor
- other conditions may include no alcohol or drugs, house arrest and/or no contact orders
Remand
which refers to accused individuals who have been charged and detained in custody
- have been denied bail
- have yet to appear before a judge
- awaiting sentence
- awaiting commencement of a custodial sentence
-remanded into custody through the issuance of a warrant of committal by a JP or judge
Security certificates
Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (S.C. 2001, c.27), security certificates can be issued against non-citizens who are deemed to pose a threat to national security
- held in detention
- without charge
- for an indefinite period of time
Certificates must be signed by both the minister of citizenship and immigration and the Minister of public safety and emergency preparedness
All adults accused of crimes have the right to retain legal counsel
- The Charter of Rights and Freedoms stipulates that persons who are arrested and detained must be informed of this fact
- they must have the opportunity to access preliminary advice from duty counsel
legal aid for the accused
delivered by lawyers in private practice, who are paid by a legal aid plan, by legal aid staff lawyers, and by lawyers working in legal aid clinics
Accussed persons who cannot understand the object and consequences of the proceedings because of mental disorder are unfit to stand trial
- s.2 of the Criminal Code states that an offender is unfit to stand trial when it is determined by the court that they are:
- unable on account of mental disorder to conduct a defence at any stage of proceedings before a verdict is rendered or to instruct counsel to so, and, in particular, unable to account of mental disorder to:
a) understand the nature or object of the proceedings
b) understand the possible consequences of the proceedings
c) communicates with counsel
Plea Bargaining
involves discussions between the Crown prosecutor and the defence surrounding the charge(s) facing the accused
- discussions of procedure
- discussions of the sentence
- discussions of the facts of the alleged offence
Crown can promise the possibility of a lower sentence by
- withdrawing some changes
- reducing a charge to a lesser but included offence
- proceeding summarily rather than with an indictment
- asking the judge that multiple prison sentences run concurrently rather than consecutively
- agreeing to a joint submission to the judge about sentencing
Plea bargaining
supporters say
- saves time and money
- reduces case backlog
- spares complaints from testifying
- eliminates uncertainty over the final verdict
- accused admits guilt
- can provide evidence to prosecute others
Plea bargaining
Detractors say
- No guidelines, so is subject to abuse
- Puts pressure on innocent to plead guilty
- Brings administration of justice into disrepute
- Not open to public scrutiny
A key concept in Canadian criminal justice is the
open court principle, which holds that, except in special circumstances, every stage of the court process must be open and accessible to the public
- including the testimony of witnesses
-public access to court proceedings is viewed as essential to ensure that accountability of the judicial system
The “trier of fact” in a criminal case
usually a judge- decides whether the guilt of the accused person has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt
- in a small number of cases, a jury of citizens makes this decision
- the jury decides on the true facts and determines the persons guilt
- the judge makes a “charge to the jury” during which the judge instructs the jurors about the law that applies to the case
- jurors do not give reasons with their verdict
The disclosure of evidence or discovery includes relevant information including
- the names and addresses of persons the Crown intends to call as witnesses
- as the results of any examinations or tests on the accused
- materials from wiretaps and surveillance
- names of expert witnesses that the crown intends to call
R. v. Stinchombe ((1991) s SCR 326) requires that the Crown
give the defence access to all evidence that might be presented in a trial, including exculpatory evidence
R. v. Neil (2009 SCC 3) places a duty on the crown
to disclosure any records of misconduct by the investigating police officers in the case
A trial takes place if the
accused person who pleads not guilty does not change that plea and the Crown does not withdraw the charges or terminate the matter with a stay of proceedings
Defences
- False accusations: wrong person arrested or fabricated by complaint
-Mental state: NCRMD, intoxication, automatism - Justification: Provocation, duress, consent, necessity, self defence, battered woman
- Procedural: validity of law, prosecution, admissibility of evidence, charter violation
The jury
Juries are finders of fact, while the role of the judge is to interpret the law, determine the admissibility of evidence, and instruct the jurors
- it is the jury that will determine the guilt or innocence
- jury decisions must be unanimous
- if the jury returns a guilty verdict, then the judge imposes a sentence
the three essential attributes of a criminal jury are
1) impartiality
2) competence
3) representativeness
there is the possibility of appeal once a case has been concluded in court
- in Canada, either the crown prosecutor or the defence lawyer can file an appeal
- a distinction is made between grounds for appeal that involve questions of law, those that involve questions of fact, and those that involve both
Verdict Appeals
- Direct offender to be acquitted
- Order a new trial
- Refuse to hear the appeal
- Hear the appeal and dismiss it
- Substitute a lesser but included offence