Canadian Criminal Justice: Courts
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course
Date
Canadian Criminal Justice: Courts
The Canadian Criminal Justice (CJS) represents a complicated, dynamic and enterprise that is ever-changing. The media source that has been used for this essay is Global News. Global News deals with coverage of news on various events that happen in foreign countries. Global News describes and at the same time describes the flow of one country to the other. The following essay is written on the basis of information retrieved from Global News. The criminal justice system is deemed an integral and high profile composition of Canadian society (Nicol & Valiquet, 2013). The CJS is very effective in achieving justice, depending on an individual’s perspective and personal experience. Controversies surrounding the CJS, such as whether certain people are treated differently from others, is often reflected in Canadian Society (Global News). There are major components that make up the CJS; police, courts, and corrections (Griffiths, 2014). Other components like crime victims, the community, and offenders will be discussed in the essay. There exists a relationship between criminal justice and the media system which has been the subject of interest and speculation throughout the twentieth century. The main objective of this essay is to critically analyze a media source relating to courts while at the same time demonstrating an understanding of the course material.
The Structure and Organization Criminal Courts
The criminal courts are known for holding strategic positions when it comes to Canada’s criminal justice systems. Significant decisions like taking a case forward by the Crown counsel are made at the court. Other decisions made in the court include negotiation pleas between the defense lawyers and Crown that might lead to guilty pleas and crucial decisions in the court like deciding whether a person is guilty. This section will deal with the structure of the criminal courts and how the courts operate. Additionally, this section will deal with how cases are processed in these criminal courts. The criminal courts play very significant and multifaceted roles in Canada’s criminal justice system; however, for many Canadians, the courts are viewed as structures of mysteries. The reason behind this vagueness is that the activities of Crown counsels and the judges are less visible than police activities.
The disposing of cases has changed a bit for the past two centuries, while the cases being received in these courts have become more complicated. Furthermore, the legal issues have turned out to be very complicated and, at the same time, make workloads heavy. Most observers have attributed these changes and heavier workloads with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Global News). Criminal courts’ main purpose is to determine whether the convicted individual is guilty or not and imposing the right sentence for those who have been convicted (Nicol & Valiquet, 2013). The criminal courts are also responsible for ensuring that the rights of the accused individual have been safeguarded. Protecting their rights involves monitoring the activities of various criminal justice agents like police towards the convicted fellows. The principle of judicial independence is necessary when it comes to the operation of the courts. This principle states that every citizen has the right to have their cases tried by immune and fair tribunals.
Canada lacks uniform court systems, and this leads to great deals of confusion when discussing various territorial and federal courts. Every province in Canada has a website known for providing information about the system of their courts (Global News). In the criminal justice system, there exist four levels of court that are responsible for dealing with illegitimate cases; they are provincial superior courts, provincial appellate courts, provincial/territorial courts, and Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) (Griffiths, 2014). The Nunavut comprises a single and unified court known as the Nunavut Court of Justice. This is where all lower courts’ powers have been combined to form one superior court where judges can hear all types of cases. The Supreme Court of Canada, on the other hand, represents the highest court for all jurisdictions. The figure below shows an outline of the Canadian criminal court system.
Canada’s Criminal Court System
The Provincial/Territorial Courts
Despite various names given to the provincial courts in the country, the provincial courts are similar in their jurisdictions. These courts are the lowest, and almost all criminal cases start and end in these courts. The provinces and territories appoint the judges who work in these courts. The judges are also responsible for funding these courts and still have jurisdiction over them. The provincial court judges sit without juries and are responsible for hearing cases under the Youth Criminal Justice Act of 2002 (Griffiths, 2014). They are responsible for solving cases that involve alleged offenses regarding provincial statutes.
The Provincial/Territorial Superior Courts
These courts represent the highest levels of courts in the province and territories. Territorial and provincial governments mostly administer them. Their judges are appointed and at the same time paid by the federal government. Almost 10 percent of the criminal courts preside in the superior courts (Global News). The territorial superior courts have two levels: trial and appeal. The court of appeal is independent and in a separate category from the Superior Court of Justice. Trial Court is involved with solving serious criminal offenses while the appeal court is involved with hearing criminal cases from the superior trial Courts (Nicol & Valiquet, 2013). The trial Court is mostly known as the Supreme Court, while the appeal court is generally known as the Court of Appeal.
The Supreme Court of Canada
This Court is located in Ottawa and is responsible for hearing cases from other provinces and territories. The Supreme Court of Canada was established under the Constitutional Act of 1867, which dictated the parliament to create a general court of appeal. The governor of the council has the mandate of appointing 9 judges who have experience of 10 years in provincial and territory courts (Global News). The Supreme Court of Canada receives many applications regarding their cases to be heard, but the Court considers about 10 percent of the cases (Griffiths, 2014). For the selected cases, they are only heard by an odd number of judges like five, seven, or nine to avoid ties. Most of the cases heard in this court involve interpreting of Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In many cases presented before the Supreme Court, the defendant or the Crown must ask for permission to leave or appeal the lower court’s decision.
Disproportionality in Sentencing
Many Courts have started considering whole life sentencing without considering parole to be a breach of the prevention of inhuman and degrading punishment. Many prisons are experiencing overpopulation due to the length of sentences impacted by judges. Therefore, addressing the lengths of sentences is the only key mechanism that can be used in the reduction of prison sentences (Global News). In criminal justice, the offender is sentenced according to the magnitude of the crime committed; the harm caused, the offender’s age, and the type of offense. Hybrid criminal offenses are crimes for the prosecutor has the alternatives of charging the victim through indictment or summary conviction (Nicol & Valiquet, 2013). Through indictment, the prosecutor goes serious about the crime in question and develops a severe punishment. On the other hand, the prosecutor may find the offense less serious and advocate for light sentencing. Either way, sentencing aims to achieve rehabilitation, deterrence, denunciation, or segregation. If the sentencing practices do not fall into this category, then it is not worth the purpose. The paper describes the Canadian ways of sentencing hybrid criminal offenses, taking into account the offender’s past and present life.
Types of Sentencing in Canadian Criminal Courts
Sentence Submission by the Defense Attorney
Following the provision in the criminal code section 787, the offense concerning a motor vehicle’s dangerous operation without any bodily harm is subject to summary conviction (Nicol & Valiquet, 2013). If the crown rules the case out as an indictment, then the defense attorney has the authority under the criminal code to file a petition to abuse the process. After the defense attorney has collected sufficient defense material regarding the crime and the offender’s life, he/she presents the case before the courtroom for the hearing. The case proceedings are read to the offender who pleads guilty as a sign of remorse for his action (Global News). The defense attorney then decides the verdict of the offender concerning the criminal code. The verdict takes into consideration the evidence collected concerning the crime. For instance, the conditions that led to the victim’s arrest, such as DUI and violation of other traffic rules (Griffiths, 2014). Pleading guilty is a sign that shows that the culprit accepts and acknowledges the impacts of his dangerous operations.
The offender should be given a light punishment since the crime does not constitute property damage or constitutes injury or death of other road users. Moreover, the culprit does not have repeat records of previous convictions to amount to an indictment (Global News). In my view, I think some probation would be an appropriate sentence on the culprit for dangerous driving. The sentence should be deterrence in nature. Since his actions have caused any harm, the penalty meted should deter the culprit from a repeat incidence. Rehabilitation sentences would also seem appropriate since his actions result from substance abuse, which seems addictive (Griffiths, 2014). The submission of the case sentencing should be convincing so that the judge rules the offense by the defense attorney’s request. The crown makes any of the two rulings concerning a hybrid criminal case.
The crown will either find the offense severe and rule an indictment or find it less severe and rule a summary conviction. Unless the defense can prove otherwise, a hybrid criminal offense’s sentencing has to adhere to the dual character. Most offenses with a summary conviction usually have a coinciding indictment sentencing (Nicol & Valiquet, 2013). The maximum penalty for the hybrid offense on a motor vehicle’s dangerous operation differs according to the circumstances following the crime. Some of the circumstances that aggravate the crime to obtain maximum sentence include blood alcohol content exceeding the limits, death resulting from the driving, and unremorseful feeling on the impacts of his actions (Griffiths, 2014). Moreover, if the culprit were over speeding in the arrest event, the incidence would attract a maximum penalty. The defense must prove that the crimes alleged against his client do not constitute the conditions that warrant a maximum penalty.
Sentence Submission by the Crown
The crown is a team that prosecutes a hybrid criminal offense. The team sentencing follows the dual character ruling to decide a case. Moreover, the decision of the team ruling is subject to debate. The team members stand to review the verdict of the offense sentencing. They reserve the right to reverse a summary conviction to an indictment or vice versa. The team mostly recommends a more severe punishment than the one given by the opposing attorney (Griffiths, 2014). For instance, in the above case, the crown would recommend severe sentencing for the offense of dangerous operation on a motor vehicle. Following the offender’s drunkenness, the crown is free to rule that he has previously operated the motor vehicle while drunk. Simply because he was not caught does not make the offense light.
The offender’s actions pose a danger to himself, other road users, and the traffic officers. The signs that the arresting officers used to identify the motor vehicle’s dangerous operation are enough evidence to recommend a maximum penalty for the offender (Griffiths, 2014). The police must have noted some abnormality in the driving of the suspect. Maybe he drove at extremely high speed, drove on the wrong lane, or any other driving, contravening the traffic rules. The criminal code stipulates that such circumstances would result in a maximum penalty (Global News). All that the crown needs are to convince the judge that the victim’s offense is worth an indictment or a sentence more severe than simply some probation as recommended by the defense attorney (Nicol & Valiquet, 2013). Severe punishment would achieve better correctional results than a lighter punishment. The offense’s cause is not incidental but intentional since the driver does not just find himself drunk, nor is he forced to drive in that state. Therefore, I recommend a jail term of not less than three years to enhance compliance with the traffic rules.
Purpose and Goals of Sentencing
After listening to both sides, the judge ruled out the offense required a summary conviction since no harm had been done to anyone. Moreover, the criminal code provides for both the summary conviction and the indictment based on the offense’s circumstances (Global News). Probation was a suitable sentence for the offense as it is proportionate. Since the cases did not have aggravating factors, the ruling had to be light and less severe. The judge had ruled similar offenses under similar circumstances in a similar way; therefore, the sentencing had to be a range of the penalties as dictated by the criminal code (Griffiths, 2014). In conclusion, hybrid criminal offenses are prosecuted by the crown. The offenses have a clear verdict, which is either a summary conviction or indictment. The ruling of various hybrid criminal offenses is contained in the criminal code of the Canadian constitution. Defense attorneys and crown team members should be aware of the criminal code ruling while making different sentence submissions.
Role of Judges and Lawyers
The presiding judge in the court plays a variety of roles. The roles include interpretation of the laws and assessing whether the evidence produced can be accepted or not. The judges are also responsible for ruling on movements already made by the Crown counsel and lawyers (Global News). They are also responsible for determining the truthfulness of the pieces of evidence produced. The judges are also responsible for making verdicts regarding the guilt or innocence of the criminal offender and at the same time passing sentences (Griffiths, 2014). Most judges serve as gatekeepers of evidence that has been produced at the court of law. It is believed that judges serve as maintainers of utility against the prejudicial effects. The judges are responsible for providing oral and written reasons behind their already made decisions. Lawyers are responsible for representing people who have been charged with criminal offenses. The main role of lawyers in the Courts of law is ensuring that the rights of the accused have been safeguarded in the court of law (Nicol & Valiquet, 2013). Lawyers are the ones that actively negotiate pleas on behalf of their clients outside the usual processes of the court. During the trial, the lawyer is responsible for presenting the evidence and questioning witnesses to build a case for the accused. The lawyer is also responsible for cross-examining case witnesses and, at the same time, challenging evidence that has been presented by the Crown.
Pre-trial and Trial Processes
A pre-trial refers to the next court date that has been scheduled after the convict has been arraigned in court. An individual is supposed to talk to a lawyer before the arrival of this date. During the pre-trial date, the case is either resolved or prepared for the next trial (Global News). If an individual wants to resolve a case, the process is similar to that of the arraignment. If an individual wants to go to a trial and does not have a lawyer, they are encouraged to file a Waiver of Counsel form, and if they had filed one during the arraignment, there is no need to file another one (Nicol & Valiquet, 2013). Pre-trial processes include all aspects of the trial that are known to occur before the trial day. These processes include filing a lawsuit, answering complaints, and preparing for trial. In the trial, a defendant is normally tried within a period of 12 months from the returning date. During the trial, the prosecution is burdened with proving that every element of the charged offense is of no doubt.
Judicial Discretion
Discretion refers to the powers that have been vested in the judiciary in making decisions on issues regarding their opinions within the constitutional direction. Discretion is known to give judiciary officials the power to act in various circumstances they deem as best. However, these powers are not absolute and therefore need to be checked to some degrees. In Canada, the main responsibility of discretion in criminal justice varies from the investigation of sentences to punishing the crime offenders (Griffiths, 2014). The parliament has not been left out since they introduce changes to the discretion from time to time. The parliament is also responsible for ensuring that discretion is used for its rightful purpose.
Restorative Justice
Restorative justices help in attaining a balance between parties involved in a case. Restorative justice also refers to a sentencing model that a community uses when trying to reconcile disputing parties and individuals. Crime is considered damaging to the parties involved and has negative effects on society in general. The process of restorative justice is very different from contemporary criminal justice processes. For restorative justice, it is a process known to build on restitution and engage the community to help the victim become better.
Conclusion
The CJS is very effective in achieving justice, depending on an individual’s perspective and personal experience. Controversies surrounding the CJS, such as whether certain people are treated differently from others, is often reflected in Canadian Society. The criminal courts are known for holding strategic positions when it comes to Canada’s criminal justice systems. Significant decisions like taking a case forward by the Crown counsel are made at the court. The Court is also responsible for the sentencing of criminal offenders. The objective of the sentencing includes deterrence, denunciation, segregation, and rehabilitation. The submission of the sentence by the two groups should help achieve one or more of the sentencing objectives. The achievement should be clear from the evidence leading to the conviction of the offender.
References
Griffiths, C. (2014). Canadian Criminal Justice: A Primer, 5e (Vol. 5). Nelson Education.
Global News. https://globalnews.ca/news/6571141/ca nada – judge – training – richard – wagner/
Nicol, J., & Valiquet, D. (2013). Bill C-13: An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Canada Evidence Act, the Competition Act and the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act. Library of Parliament.