Summary Conviction Penalty Details

Summary

The default maximum penalty for summary conviction offences in Canada, as of September 19, 2019, is 6 months jail and a $5,000 fine. For indictable offences, the default maximum jail term is 5 years unless specified otherwise by the Criminal Code. In Ontario, trials for summary conviction offences are held in the Ontario Court of Justice. Bill C-75 extended the limitation period for summary conviction offences to 12 months but did not change the limitation period for indictable offences. The Supreme Court of Canada in R. V. Cuerrier recognized that failure to disclose a serious sexually transmitted disease could vitiate consent, impacting charges related to sexual assault.

Full Conversation

Jane is charged in Ottawa with Robbery, an indictable offence contrary to section * that carries a maximum penalty of life in jail. She is pleading Not Guilty and wants to go to trial. When setting a trial date, the court clerk asks her what her "election" is (as to mode of trial). Which of the following is one of the options open to Jane? Question * options: A trial in the Ontario Court of Appeal. Jane has no choice. Her "election" refers to her choice of lawyer. A trial in the House of Lords. A jury trial in the Superior Court of Justice, preceded (if she wants) by a preliminary inquiry in the Ontario Court of Justice.
Jane has the option of a jury trial in the Superior Court of Justice, preceded (if she wants) by a preliminary inquiry in the Ontario Court of Justice.
Unless the Criminal Code specifies otherwise, the default maximum jail term available for an indictable offence is… Question * options: Life 5 years 2 years 25 years 10 years 18 months 14 years 2 years less a day
The default maximum jail term available for an indictable offence, unless the Criminal Code specifies otherwise, is 5 years.
In R. v. Cuerrier, the Supreme Court of Canada considered s. *(*)(c) of the Criminal Code in the context of a sexual assault case. Specifically, the Supreme Court reviewed the circumstances where fraud could vitiate consent (make the consent invalid). Which type of fraud was recognized for the first time in Cuerrier? Question * options: Fraud as to the nature of the sexual act Fraud as to the perpetrator's identity Failure to disclose that the perpetrator is infected with a serious sexually transmitted disease All of the above Two of the above None of the above
Case Rating: *
In R. v. Cuerrier, the Supreme Court of Canada recognized for the first time that the failure to disclose that the perpetrator is infected with a serious sexually transmitted disease could vitiate consent. This decision highlighted the importance of informed consent in the context of sexual relations.
The police conduct surveillance in the Byward Market in Ottawa, by installing hidden cameras at various locations and filming transactions between sex trade workers and their prospective clients. They let the cameras run for a year and then do a sweep where they make a number of arrests. On February *, *, the cameras caught Chris make a deal with a client for a sexual transaction. The police charged Chris on October *, * with Communicating for the Purposes of Providing Sexual Services, a summary conviction offence (s. *(*.*) of the Criminal Code). Can the Crown proceed with this prosecution? State why or why not. Would your answer be different if the dates were in *, not *? Why or why not?
Case Rating: *
The Crown can proceed with the prosecution of Chris. As of September *, *, the limitation period for summary conviction offences was extended to 12 months. Since Chris was charged within this period (February *, * to October *, *), the prosecution is valid.
If the dates were in *, the same *-month limitation period would apply, and the prosecution would still be valid if charges were laid within that period.
Can a person who is in possession of contraband (drugs, weapons, stolen property, child pornography, etc.) be acquitted on the basis of "innocent possession"? If so, what might amount to "innocent possession"? If not, why not? Name one appellate decision that supports your answer.
Case Rating: *
In Ontario, "innocent possession" can be a defense in some cases, but it is quite limited. "Innocent possession" means the person had no knowledge of the contraband or had a legitimate reason for possessing it temporarily.
For example:
- Finding contraband and intending to turn it in to authorities.
- Possessing contraband unknowingly, such as someone placing it in your bag without your knowledge.
One appellate decision that supports this is R. v. Beaver, [*] S.C.R. *, where the Supreme Court of Canada recognized that lack of knowledge about the possession of a narcotic could be a defense.
To better understand your situation, could you provide more details about the specific circumstances of the possession?
Can a person who is in possession of contraband (drugs, weapons, stolen property, child pornography, etc.) be acquitted on the basis of "innocent possession"? If so, what might amount to "innocent possession"? If not, why not? Name one appellate decision that supports your answer.
Case Rating: *
In Ontario, "innocent possession" can be a defense in some cases, but it is quite limited. "Innocent possession" means the person had no knowledge of the contraband or had a legitimate reason for possessing it temporarily.
For example:
- Finding contraband and intending to turn it in to authorities.
- Possessing contraband unknowingly, such as someone placing it in your bag without your knowledge.
One appellate decision that supports this is R. v. Beaver, [*] S.C.R. *, where the Supreme Court of Canada recognized that lack of knowledge about the possession of a narcotic could be a defense.
Could you provide more details about the specific circumstances of the possession?
The actus reus of a crime can consist of up to * elements (some would say *, as one element can be broken down into two). What are the * (or *) potential elements of the actus reus? (No explanation is required.)
Case Rating: *
- Conduct (the physical act)
- Circumstances (the context within which the act occurs)
- Consequences (the result of the act)
- Causation (linking the act to the consequence)
Is there anything specific you need assistance with regarding these elements?
In *, Bill C-* replaced undertakings and recognizances with a single document. What is the name of the document that accused people are now released on if released by the court?
Case Rating: *
The document that accused people are now released on if released by the court is called an "undertaking."
If you have any other questions or need further clarification, feel free to ask!
In *, Bill C-* replaced undertakings and recognizances with a single document. What is the name of the document that accused people are now released on if released by the court?
Case Rating: *
The document is called a "release order."
Do you have any other questions or need further clarification on this topic?
In *, Bill C-* replaced undertakings and recognizances with a single document. What is the name of the document that accused people are now released on if released by the court?
Case Rating: *
The document that accused people are now released on if released by the court is called a "release order."
Is there anything else you need help with?
Can a person be convicted of Aggravated Assault for failing to disclose to a sexual partner that he has a serious sexually transmitted disease, if that partner is not affected by the accused or was already infected before the sexual activity with the accused? Answer yes or no; if no, is there anything else that the accused can be convicted of instead, and if so, what? Name the case that supports your answer.
Case Rating: *
No, a person cannot be convicted of Aggravated Assault if the partner is not affected or was already infected before the sexual activity. However, the accused might be convicted of sexual assault due to fraud vitiating consent, as recognized in the case of R. v. Cuerrier.
Can a person be convicted of Aggravated Assault for failing to disclose to a sexual partner that he has a serious sexually transmitted disease, if that partner is not affected by the accused or was already infected before the sexual activity with the accused? Answer yes or no; if no, is there anything else that the accused can be convicted of instead, and if so, what? Name the case that supports your answer.
Case Rating: *
No, a person cannot be convicted of Aggravated Assault if the partner is not affected or was already infected before the sexual activity. However, the accused can be convicted of sexual assault due to fraud vitiating consent, as recognized in the case of *R. v. Cuerrier*.
Do you have any other legal questions or need further clarification?
Can a person be convicted of Aggravated Assault for failing to disclose to a sexual partner that he has a serious sexually transmitted disease, if that partner is not affected by the accused or was already infected before the sexual activity with the accused? Answer yes or no; if no, is there anything else that the accused can be convicted of instead, and if so, what? Name the case that supports your answer.
Case Rating: *
No, a person cannot be convicted of Aggravated Assault if the partner is not affected or was already infected before the sexual activity. However, the accused can be convicted of sexual assault due to fraud vitiating consent, as recognized in the case of *R. v. Cuerrier*.
Is there anything else you need help with?
True or false: the limitation period for indictable offences was increased by Bill C-* in September *. Question * options: True False
Case Rating: *
False. Bill C-* primarily affected summary conviction offences, notably extending their limitation period, but it did not increase the limitation period for indictable offences.
Is there anything else you need help with?
True or false: the limitation period for indictable offences was increased by Bill C-* in September *. Question * options: True False
Case Rating: *
False. Bill C-* primarily affected summary conviction offences, extending their limitation period, but it did not increase the limitation period for indictable offences.
Do you need help with any other legal questions?
In Ontario, where does the trial of a summary conviction offence take place? Question * options: The Court of Queen's Bench The Québec Superior Court The House of Lords The Summary Conviction Appeal Court It depends on the accused's election: the accused could choose the Ontario Court of Justice or the Superior Court, with or without a jury The Ontario Court of Justice The Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Case Rating: *
In Ontario, the trial of a summary conviction offence typically takes place in The Ontario Court of Justice.
Do you have any other legal questions?
In Ontario, where does the trial of a summary conviction offence take place? Question * options: The Court of Queen's Bench The Québec Superior Court The House of Lords The Summary Conviction Appeal Court It depends on the accused's election: the accused could choose the Ontario Court of Justice or the Superior Court, with or without a jury The Ontario Court of Justice The Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Case Rating: *
The trial for a summary conviction offence in Ontario typically takes place in The Ontario Court of Justice.
Do you have any other legal questions or need further clarification on this topic?