Criminal Charges (1:IV) - Revision history

LSLAP at 18:53, 13 October 2025

2025-10-13T18:53:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:53, 13 October 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= 11 August 2025}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= 1 August 2025}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = criminal}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = criminal}}

LSLAP: /* e) Are there any other Exclusion Rules? */

2025-09-22T21:39:52Z

e) Are there any other Exclusion Rules?

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:39, 22 September 2025
Line 179:		Line 179:

	==== e) Are there any other Exclusion Rules? ====		==== e) Are there any other Exclusion Rules? ====
	Consider whether there are other exclusionary rules that could be used to exclude any key pieces of evidence that the Crown needs to prove its case. Generally, if a piece of evidence has more prejudicial effects than probative value, the evidence will be excluded ([https://canlii.ca/t/1fskf ''R v Seaboyer''(1991) 2 SCR 577]).		Consider whether there are other exclusionary rules that could be used to exclude any key pieces of evidence that the Crown needs to prove its case. Generally, if a piece of evidence has more prejudicial effects than probative value, the evidence will be excluded (''[https://canlii.ca/t/1fskf R v Seaboyer]'',(1991) 2 SCR 577).

	{{LSLAP Manual Navbox\|type=chapters1-7}}		{{LSLAP Manual Navbox\|type=chapters1-7}}

LSLAP: /* 4. Release Conditions (Contained within the Bail Document) */

2025-09-22T21:38:44Z

4. Release Conditions (Contained within the Bail Document)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:38, 22 September 2025
Line 154:		Line 154:

	=== 4. Release Conditions (Contained within the Bail Document) ===		=== 4. Release Conditions (Contained within the Bail Document) ===
	Release documents can be obtained from the court registry if the accused has misplaced the copy they should have been given upon release. The accused should review the release conditions and ensure that they understand all of the conditions and the importance of abiding by the conditions of release regardless of how unfair or difficult those conditions are to abide. In a case of domestic assault, there will almost always be no-contact conditions and area restrictions. The accused may encounter situations where the complainant and the accused wish for contact and there is a no-contact bail condition. In such cases, the accused and their counsel could look into bail variations (see '''section IV~~. B.~~''' above for bail variations).		Release documents can be obtained from the court registry if the accused has misplaced the copy they should have been given upon release. The accused should review the release conditions and ensure that they understand all of the conditions and the importance of abiding by the conditions of release regardless of how unfair or difficult those conditions are to abide. In a case of domestic assault, there will almost always be no-contact conditions and area restrictions. The accused may encounter situations where the complainant and the accused wish for contact and there is a no-contact bail condition. In such cases, the accused and their counsel could look into bail variations (see '''section IV''' above for bail variations).

	If the accused has a good reason to have their release conditions varied, Crown Counsel should be contacted. The reason for the proposed variation should be explained to Crown Counsel. It is important to make a convincing argument for the proposed variation directly to Crown Counsel, as an application cannot be made to vary bail conditions in Provincial Court without the Crown’s consent. In practice, Crown Counsel only consents to hearing applications for bail variation in Provincial Court when they agree with the proposed variations. Variation applications without Crown Counsel’s consent can be made at the BC Supreme Court.		If the accused has a good reason to have their release conditions varied, Crown Counsel should be contacted. The reason for the proposed variation should be explained to Crown Counsel. It is important to make a convincing argument for the proposed variation directly to Crown Counsel, as an application cannot be made to vary bail conditions in Provincial Court without the Crown’s consent. In practice, Crown Counsel only consents to hearing applications for bail variation in Provincial Court when they agree with the proposed variations. Variation applications without Crown Counsel’s consent can be made at the BC Supreme Court.

LSLAP: /* 2. The Initial Sentencing Position (ISP) */

2025-09-22T21:38:09Z

2. The Initial Sentencing Position (ISP)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:38, 22 September 2025
Line 138:		Line 138:

	=== 2. The Initial Sentencing Position (ISP) ===		=== 2. The Initial Sentencing Position (ISP) ===
	The Crown’s Initial Sentencing Position should be reviewed. This will sometimes indicate whether the Crown is seeking jail time, or it can specify the sentence the Crown is seeking. A request for a more detailed initial sentencing position can be made. See [[Sample_Initial_Sentencing_Position_(1:~~App_A~~)\|Appendix A]] for a sample ISP.		The Crown’s Initial Sentencing Position should be reviewed. This will sometimes indicate whether the Crown is seeking jail time, or it can specify the sentence the Crown is seeking. A request for a more detailed initial sentencing position can be made. See [[Sample_Initial_Sentencing_Position_(1:App_B)\|Appendix B]] for a sample ISP.

	=== 3. Report to Crown Counsel (RTCC) ===		=== 3. Report to Crown Counsel (RTCC) ===

LSLAP: /* d) Striking down an Information */

2025-09-22T21:36:50Z

d) Striking down an Information

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:36, 22 September 2025
Line 123:		Line 123:

	==== d) Striking down an Information ====		==== d) Striking down an Information ====
	Provisions exist for a motion to be made to quash the Information (or a count therein) before the plea or, with leave of the court, afterwards (''Criminal Code'', s 601(1)). Although this is rare, situations in which an Information might be struck down include if it does not adequately state the charge, does not include the date of the offence, or contains an unclear description of the circumstances of the alleged offence. To remedy the defect, the court may quash the Information or order an amendment. Amendment powers are considerable, and the Information may be amended at any time during the trial so long as the accused is not prejudiced or misled. The court will generally amend an Information if the defects are in form only. ''[https://canlii.ca/t/g9ngh R v Stewart]''(1979), 46 CCC (2d) 97 (BCCA) makes it clear that courts tend to focus on substantial wrongs, not mere technicalities. There are generous provisions in the ''Criminal Code'' that allow technical defects in form and style to be disregarded (''Criminal Code'', ss 581(2) and (3), and s 601(3)).		Provisions exist for a motion to be made to quash the Information (or a count therein) before the plea or, with leave of the court, afterwards (''Criminal Code'', s 601(1)). Although this is rare, situations in which an Information might be struck down include if it does not adequately state the charge, does not include the date of the offence, or contains an unclear description of the circumstances of the alleged offence. To remedy the defect, the court may quash the Information or order an amendment. Amendment powers are considerable, and the Information may be amended at any time during the trial so long as the accused is not prejudiced or misled. The court will generally amend an Information if the defects are in form only. ''[https://canlii.ca/t/g9ngh R v Stewart]'', (1979) 46 CCC (2d) 97 (BCCA) makes it clear that courts tend to focus on substantial wrongs, not mere technicalities. There are generous provisions in the ''Criminal Code'' that allow technical defects in form and style to be disregarded (''Criminal Code'', ss 581(2) and (3), and s 601(3)).

	{\| class="wikitable"		{\| class="wikitable"

LSLAP: /* d) Striking down an Information */

2025-09-22T21:35:59Z

d) Striking down an Information

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:35, 22 September 2025
Line 123:		Line 123:

	==== d) Striking down an Information ====		==== d) Striking down an Information ====
	Provisions exist for a motion to be made to quash the Information (or a count therein) before the plea or, with leave of the court, afterwards (''Criminal Code'', s 601(1)). Although this is rare, situations in which an Information might be struck down include if it does not adequately state the charge, does not include the date of the offence, or contains an unclear description of the circumstances of the alleged offence. To remedy the defect, the court may quash the Information or order an amendment. Amendment powers are considerable, and the Information may be amended at any time during the trial so long as the accused is not prejudiced or misled. The court will generally amend an Information if the defects are in form only. '''[https://canlii.ca/t/g9ngh R v Stewart]'''(1979), 46 CCC (2d) 97 (BCCA) makes it clear that courts tend to focus on substantial wrongs, not mere technicalities. There are generous provisions in the ''Criminal Code'' that allow technical defects in form and style to be disregarded (''Criminal Code'', ss 581(2) and (3), and s 601(3)).		Provisions exist for a motion to be made to quash the Information (or a count therein) before the plea or, with leave of the court, afterwards (''Criminal Code'', s 601(1)). Although this is rare, situations in which an Information might be struck down include if it does not adequately state the charge, does not include the date of the offence, or contains an unclear description of the circumstances of the alleged offence. To remedy the defect, the court may quash the Information or order an amendment. Amendment powers are considerable, and the Information may be amended at any time during the trial so long as the accused is not prejudiced or misled. The court will generally amend an Information if the defects are in form only. ''[https://canlii.ca/t/g9ngh R v Stewart]''(1979), 46 CCC (2d) 97 (BCCA) makes it clear that courts tend to focus on substantial wrongs, not mere technicalities. There are generous provisions in the ''Criminal Code'' that allow technical defects in form and style to be disregarded (''Criminal Code'', ss 581(2) and (3), and s 601(3)).

	{\| class="wikitable"		{\| class="wikitable"

LSLAP: /* d) Striking down an Information */

2025-09-22T21:34:40Z

d) Striking down an Information

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:34, 22 September 2025
Line 123:		Line 123:

	==== d) Striking down an Information ====		==== d) Striking down an Information ====
	Provisions exist for a motion to be made to quash the Information (or a count therein) before the plea or, with leave of the court, afterwards (''Criminal Code'', s 601(1)). Although this is rare, situations in which an Information might be struck down include if it does not adequately state the charge, does not include the date of the offence, or contains an unclear description of the circumstances of the alleged offence. To remedy the defect, the court may quash the Information or order an amendment. Amendment powers are considerable, and the Information may be amended at any time during the trial so long as the accused is not prejudiced or misled. The court will generally amend an Information if the defects are in form only. '''[https://canlii.ca/t/g9ngh ''R v Stewart'']'''(1979), 46 CCC (2d) 97 (BCCA) makes it clear that courts tend to focus on substantial wrongs, not mere technicalities. There are generous provisions in the ''Criminal Code'' that allow technical defects in form and style to be disregarded (''Criminal Code'', ss 581(2) and (3), and s 601(3)).		Provisions exist for a motion to be made to quash the Information (or a count therein) before the plea or, with leave of the court, afterwards (''Criminal Code'', s 601(1)). Although this is rare, situations in which an Information might be struck down include if it does not adequately state the charge, does not include the date of the offence, or contains an unclear description of the circumstances of the alleged offence. To remedy the defect, the court may quash the Information or order an amendment. Amendment powers are considerable, and the Information may be amended at any time during the trial so long as the accused is not prejudiced or misled. The court will generally amend an Information if the defects are in form only. '''[https://canlii.ca/t/g9ngh R v Stewart]'''(1979), 46 CCC (2d) 97 (BCCA) makes it clear that courts tend to focus on substantial wrongs, not mere technicalities. There are generous provisions in the ''Criminal Code'' that allow technical defects in form and style to be disregarded (''Criminal Code'', ss 581(2) and (3), and s 601(3)).

	{\| class="wikitable"		{\| class="wikitable"
	! style="font-style: italic;text-align: left;" \| Challenging an Information		! style="font-style: italic;text-align: left;" \| Challenging an Information
	\|-		\|-
	\| Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the offence as alleged in the Information. This includes the identity of the accused, the location of the crime (British Columbia), the physical criminal act, and a guilty mind. Amendments to an Information after the defence has closed its case are less likely to be granted. This is because the accused is prejudiced by any subsequent amendment of the Information. Hence a possible strategy on a case where there is an error in the Information is to wait out the Crown’s case, close the defence case, and then argue reasonable doubt on the offence as alleged ([https://canlii.ca/t/1fsvd ''R v Saunders'', [1990<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 S.C.R. 1020]).		\| Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the offence as alleged in the Information. This includes the identity of the accused, the location of the crime (British Columbia), the physical criminal act, and a guilty mind. Amendments to an Information after the defence has closed its case are less likely to be granted. This is because the accused is prejudiced by any subsequent amendment of the Information. Hence a possible strategy on a case where there is an error in the Information is to wait out the Crown’s case, close the defence case, and then argue reasonable doubt on the offence as alleged (''[https://canlii.ca/t/1fsvd R v Saunders]'', [1990<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 S.C.R. 1020]).
	\|}		\|}

LSLAP: /* d) Striking down an Information */

2025-09-22T21:32:12Z

d) Striking down an Information

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:32, 22 September 2025
Line 123:		Line 123:

	==== d) Striking down an Information ====		==== d) Striking down an Information ====
	Provisions exist for a motion to be made to quash the Information (or a count therein) before the plea or, with leave of the court, afterwards (''Criminal Code'', s 601(1)). Although this is rare, situations in which an Information might be struck down include if it does not adequately state the charge, does not include the date of the offence, or contains an unclear description of the circumstances of the alleged offence. To remedy the defect, the court may quash the Information or order an amendment. Amendment powers are considerable, and the Information may be amended at any time during the trial so long as the accused is not prejudiced or misled. The court will generally amend an Information if the defects are in form only. [https://canlii.ca/t/g9ngh ''R v Stewart''(1979), 46 CCC (2d) 97 (BCCA)] makes it clear that courts tend to focus on substantial wrongs, not mere technicalities. There are generous provisions in the ''Criminal Code'' that allow technical defects in form and style to be disregarded (''Criminal Code'', ss 581(2) and (3), and s 601(3)).		Provisions exist for a motion to be made to quash the Information (or a count therein) before the plea or, with leave of the court, afterwards (''Criminal Code'', s 601(1)). Although this is rare, situations in which an Information might be struck down include if it does not adequately state the charge, does not include the date of the offence, or contains an unclear description of the circumstances of the alleged offence. To remedy the defect, the court may quash the Information or order an amendment. Amendment powers are considerable, and the Information may be amended at any time during the trial so long as the accused is not prejudiced or misled. The court will generally amend an Information if the defects are in form only. '''[https://canlii.ca/t/g9ngh ''R v Stewart'']'''(1979), 46 CCC (2d) 97 (BCCA) makes it clear that courts tend to focus on substantial wrongs, not mere technicalities. There are generous provisions in the ''Criminal Code'' that allow technical defects in form and style to be disregarded (''Criminal Code'', ss 581(2) and (3), and s 601(3)).

	{\| class="wikitable"		{\| class="wikitable"

LSLAP: /* 1. The Information */

2025-09-22T21:30:59Z

1. The Information

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:30, 22 September 2025
Line 109:		Line 109:

	=== 1. The Information ===		=== 1. The Information ===
	The “Information” contains the specifics of the charge, including the date of the alleged offence, the name of the accused, and the specific section of the statute allegedly contravened. The Information guides the entire legal process faced by the accused. See [[~~Sample_Information_~~(1:~~App_B~~)\|Appendix B]] for a sample Information.		The “Information” contains the specifics of the charge, including the date of the alleged offence, the name of the accused, and the specific section of the statute allegedly contravened. The Information guides the entire legal process faced by the accused. See '''[[Sample Information (1:App A)\|Appendix A]]''' for a sample Information.

	==== a) Review the Information ====		==== a) Review the Information ====

LSLAP: /* 2. Language Rights */

2025-09-22T21:27:24Z

2. Language Rights

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:27, 22 September 2025
Line 94:		Line 94:

	=== 2. Language Rights ===		=== 2. Language Rights ===
	Since the release of [https://canlii.ca/t/k4f3g ''R v Tayo Tompouba'', 2024 SCC 16], courts have been careful to ensure that all accused persons are aware of their language rights under s. 530 of the ''Criminal Code''. Often, the accused will be informed of these rights at the first appearance. Alternatively, the Provincial Court has developed a standard form that can be used to satisfy the requirement that the accused be informed of their language rights. This form can be accessed at:		Since the release of ''[https://canlii.ca/t/k4f3g R v Tayo Tompouba]'', 2024 SCC 16, courts have been careful to ensure that all accused persons are aware of their language rights under s. 530 of the ''Criminal Code''. Often, the accused will be informed of these rights at the first appearance. Alternatively, the Provincial Court has developed a standard form that can be used to satisfy the requirement that the accused be informed of their language rights. This form can be accessed at:

	https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/law-crime-and-justice/courthouse-services/court-files-records/court-forms/criminal/pcr976.pdf		https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/law-crime-and-justice/courthouse-services/court-files-records/court-forms/criminal/pcr976.pdf