« Complot (infraction) » : différence entre les versions

De Le carnet de droit pénal
m AdminF a déplacé la page Conspiration (Infraction) vers Conspiration (infraction)
Aucun résumé des modifications
Ligne 1 : Ligne 1 :
{{en|Conspiracy_(Offence)}}
{{en|Conspiracy_(Offence)}}
{{fr|Conspiration_(infraction)}}
{{Currency2|January|2020}}
{{LevelZero}}{{HeaderLiability}}
{{HeaderOffences}}
{{OffenceBox
|OffenceTitle=Conspiracy
|OffencePage=Conspiracy
|Section=465
|Act={{OBCCC}}
|CrownElection= {{OBIndictableElection}} (465(1)(b) and (c))<br> {{OBSummaryElection}} (465(1)(d))
|Jurisdiction=s. 465(1)(b), (c):<br>{{OBJurisdictionAll}}<br>s. 465(1)(a):<br>{{OBJurisdictionExclusive}}<br>s.465(1)(d):<br>{{OBJurisdictionSumm}}
|Bail={{OBBailVar}}
|SummaryDisp= {{OBDispAll}}
|SummaryMin= {{OBMinNone}}
|SummaryMax= {{OBSConviction}}
|IndictableDisp= {{OBDisp14orLifeVar}}
|IndictableMin= {{OBMinNone}}
|IndictableMax= {{OBTime|5, 10 years}} or {{OBMaxLife}} }}
==Overview==
{{OverviewXIII|conspiracy}}
; Pleadings
<!--
{{PleadingsHeader-N}}
{{PleadingsIndictableList-N|s.  }}
{{PleadingsSummaryList|s. }}
{{PleadingsEnd}}
-->
{{PleadingsExclusive|s. 465(1)(a) {{DescrSec|465(1)(a)}} }}
{{PleadingsIndictElection|s. 465(1)(b) and (c)}}
{{PleadingsSummary|s. 465(1)(d) {{DescrSec|465(1)(d)}}}}
; Release
{{ReleaseHeader}}
|s. 465(1)(a), (b) || {{ReleaseProfile-Indictable}}
|-
|s. 465(1)(d) {{DescrSec|465(1)(d)}} || {{ReleaseProfile-Hybrid}}
|-
{{ReleaseEnd}}
{{ReleaseOptions-Indictable|s. 465(1)(a), (b)}}
{{ReleaseOptions-Hybrid|s. 465(1)(d) {{DescrSec|465(1)(d)}} }}
:''<u>Reverse Onus Bail</u>''
{{ReverseOnusCirc}}
; Publication Ban
{{GeneralPubBan}}
; Offence Designations
{{DesignationHeader}}
|-
|s. 465(1)(a) {{DescrSec|465(1)(a)}},<br>s. 465(1)(b)(i) {{DescrSec|465(1)(b)(i)}},<br>s. 465(1)(b)(ii) {{DescrSec|465(1)(b)(ii)}},<br>s. 465(1)(c) {{DescrSec|465(1)(c)}},<br>s. 465(1)(d) {{DescrSec|465(1)(d)}}  || {{OKMark}} <!--wire--> || {{OKMark}} <!--DO-->||{{OKMark}} <!--SPIO--> || {{XMark}} <!--consent--> || {{OKMark}}
{{DesignationEnd}}
<!-- I'm NOT entirely sure on those designations -->
{{SeeBelowForAncillary}}
{{reflist|2}}
==Offence Wording==
{{quotation2|
; Conspiracy
465 (1) Except where otherwise expressly provided by law, the following provisions apply in respect of conspiracy:
:(a) every one who conspires with any one to commit murder or to cause another person to be murdered, whether in Canada or not, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a maximum term of imprisonment for life;
:(b) every one who conspires with any one to prosecute a person for an alleged offence, knowing that they did not commit that offence, is guilty of
::(i) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years or an offence punishable on summary conviction, if the alleged offence is one for which, on conviction, that person would be liable to be sentenced to imprisonment for life or for a term of not more than 14 years, or
::(ii) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years or an offence punishable on summary conviction, if the alleged offence is one for which, on conviction, that person would be liable to imprisonment for less than 14 years;
:(c) every one who conspires with any one to commit an indictable offence not provided for in paragraph (a) or (b) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to the same punishment as that to which an accused who is guilty of that offence would, on conviction, be liable; and
:(d) every one who conspires with any one to commit an offence punishable on summary conviction is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
(2) [Repealed, {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)}}, s. 61]
<br>
{{removed|(3), (4), (5), (6) and (7)}}
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 465;
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)}}, s. 61;
{{LegHistory90s|1998, c. 35}}, s. 121;
{{LegHistory10s|2018, c. 11}}, s. 28;
{{LegHistory10s|2019, c. 25}}, s. 183.
|{{CCCSec2|465}}
|{{NoteUp|465|1|2}}
}}
{{quotation2|
; Conspiracy in restraint of trade
466 (1) A conspiracy in restraint of trade is an agreement between two or more persons to do or to procure to be done any unlawful act in restraint of trade.
<br>
; Trade union, exception
(2) The purposes of a trade union are not, by reason only that they are in restraint of trade, unlawful within the meaning of subsection (1) {{AnnSec4|466(1)}}.
<br>
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 466;
{{LegHistory90s|1992, c. 1}}, s. 60(F).
{{Annotation}}
|{{CCCSec2|466}}
|{{NoteUp|466|1|2}}
}}
===Draft Form of Charges===
{{seealso|Draft Form of Charges}}
{{DraftHeader}}
|-
|465
|
|"{{ellipsis1}} contrary to section 465{{CCC}}."
|-
|466
|
|"{{ellipsis1}} contrary to section 466{{CCC}}."
{{DraftEnd}}
==Proof of the Offence==
{{ElementHeader}}
{{ElementLeft}}
{{Proving|conspiracy|465}}<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Root|2200k|2008 ONCA 869 (CanLII)|241 CCC (3d) 125}}{{perONCA-H|Watt JA}}{{atL|2200k|66}}
</ref>
{{InitialElements}}
# {{box}} the words communicated in the conspiracy
# {{box}} there was an agreement made between the parties
# {{box}} the parties had an intention to agree to put a "common design into effect" and did in fact agree
# {{box}} the parties did not change their minds or intention to put common design into effect
{{ElementEnd}}
{{reflist|2}}
==Interpretation==
The purpose of criminalizing conspiracies is to "prevent an unlawful object" from being fulfilled and then "prevent[ing] serious harm from occurring". Parliament intended to intervene "earlier along the continuum of the increased danger represented by a cohort or wrongdoers acting in concert."<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Dery|1q1hs|2006 SCC 53 (CanLII)|[2006] 2 SCR 669}}{{perSCC-H|Fish J}}{{atL|1q1hs|44}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Meyer|fvj4v|2012 ONCJ 791 (CanLII)|[2012] OJ No 6235}}{{perONCJ|Pacciocco J}}{{atL|fvj4v|21}}("The law of conspiracy achieves this policy [of preventing serious harm from occurring] by allowing a pre-emptive strike where there is a true agreement to achieve a mutual criminal objective.")
</ref>
A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to do an unlawful act.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|O'Brien|21v9k|1954 CanLII 42|[1954] SCR 666}}{{perSCC|Taschereau J}}{{atps|668-9}}<br>
See: {{CanLIIRP|Paradis|fsmsh|1933 CanLII 75 (SCC)|[1934] SCR 165}}{{perSCC|Rinfret J}}{{atp|186}} - defines as two or more persons agreeing to act in concert in pursuit of a common goal<br>
</ref>
There must be an "intention to agree, the completion of an agreement and a common design."<ref>
{{CanLIIRPC|United States of America v Dynar|1fr0t|1997 CanLII 359 (SCC)|[1997] 2 SCR 462}}{{perSCC|Cory and Iacobucci JJ}}{{atL|1fr0t|86}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Root|2200k|2008 ONCA 869 (CanLII)|[2008] OJ No 5214 (OCA)}}{{perONCA-H|Watt JA}}{{atL|2200k|66}}</ref>
The Crown needs only prove that there was "a meeting of the minds with regard to a common design to do something unlawful."<ref>
{{supra1|Dynar}}{{atL|1fr0t|87}}</ref>
To prove conspiracy the facts must satisfy a three-part Carter test:<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Carter|1z1c7|1982 CanLII 35 (SCC)|[1982] 1 SCR 938}}{{perSCC-H|McIntyre J}}</ref>
# has the Crown proven beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the conspiracy?
# has the Crown proven that the accused was on balance a member of the conspiracy?
# considering all of the evidence, including hearsay evidence, is the accused guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of being a member of the conspiracy?
trier of fact concludes on a balance of probabilities that the accused is a member of the conspiracy then [the trier] must go on and decide whether the Crown has established such membership beyond reasonable doubt. In this last step only, the trier of fact can apply the hearsay exception and consider evidence of acts and declarations of co-conspirators done in furtherance of the object of the conspiracy as evidence against the accused on the issue of his guilt.
A conspiracy must include (1) an agreement and (2) the unlawful objective or "common design."<ref>
{{supra1|O'Brien}}{{atsL|21v9k|2| to 3}}, ("It is of course, essential that the conspirators have the intention to agree, and this agreement must be complete ... there must exist an intention to put the common design into effect.")<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Root|2200k|2008 ONCA 869 (CanLII)|241 CCC (3d) 125}}{{perONCA-H|Watt JA}}
</ref>
As well, the unlawful objective does not need to come about. It is the planning that is the criminal act.<ref>
{{supra1|O'Brien}}{{atL|21v9k|4}} ("The law punishes conspiracy so that the unlawful object is not attained. It considers that several persons who agree together to commit an unlawful act, are a menace to society, and even if they do nothing in furtherance of their common design, the state intervenes to exercise a repressive action, so that the intention is not materialized, and does not become harmful to any one.")
</ref>
A conspiracy made over the telephone will occur within the jurisdiction of both calling parties.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Doucette|5cq6|2003 PESCAD 7 (CanLII)|666 APR 163}}, ''per'' Mitchell CJ</ref>
Both legal and factual impossibility are not defences to an allegation of conspiracy.<ref>
{{supra1|Dynar}}{{atL|1fr0t|105}} (It is not relevant whether "from an objective point of view, commission of the offence may be impossible.")</ref>
It is not necessary to prove that the predicate offence was actually committed.<ref>
See {{CanLIIRP|Koufis|fsmws|1941 CanLII 55 (SCC)|[1941] SCR 481, 76 CCC 161 (SCC)}}{{perSCC|Taschereau J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Beaven|fvz5s|2013 SKQB 7 (CanLII)|411 Sask R 129}}{{perSKQB|Rothery J}}{{atL|fvz5s|73}}<br>
</ref>
The fact that the co-conspirators are unidentified does not result in a failure to prove the offence of conspiracy.<ref>
{{supra1|Root}}{{atL|2200k|69}}</ref>
{{reflist|2}}
===Agreement===
The agreement is the essence of the offence of conspiracy.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Papalia|1tx7p|1979 CanLII 38 (SCC)|[1979] 2 SCR 256}}{{perSCC|Dickson J}} ("The essence of criminal conspiracy is proof of agreement...")
</ref>
An agreement can be implied or tacit. It requires a meeting of the minds to create a common intention to commit an offence.
The parties must have knowledge of a common goal and agreement to achieve it.<ref>
{{CanLIIRPC|Atlantic Sugar Refineries Co. v Canada (Attorney General)|1z493|1980 CanLII 226 (SCC)|54 CCC (2d) 373, [1980] 2 SCR 644}}{{perSCC|Pigeon J}}</ref>
There must be a "consensus to effect an unlawful purpose."<ref>
{{supra2|1tx7p|Papalia}} (“two or more persons pursued the same unlawful object at the same time or in the same place; it is necessary to show a consensus to effect an unlawful purpose. ”)<br>
</ref>
It is not enough that there be a common intention.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|O'Brien|21v9k|1954 CanLII 42|[1954] SCR 666}}{{perSCC|Taschereau J}}</ref>
Nor is passive acquiescence to a criminal plan sufficient<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|McNamara|gd1kv|1981 CanLII 3120 (ON CA)|56 CCC (2d) 193}}{{TheCourtONCA}} at 452 ("Mere knowledge of, discussion of or passive acquiescence in a plan of criminal conduct is not, of itself, sufficient")
</ref>
, knowledge of the plan<ref>
Goode, Criminal Conspiracy in Canada (1975), p. 16</ref>
, or nor wilful blindness.
It is not a "formal agreement" and may be implicit.<ref>
Goode, Criminal Conspiracy in Canada (1975), p. 16<br>
</ref>
Where there is a pre-existing conspiracy, the accused must have adopted it or consented to participate in achieving the goal.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Lamontagne|1mw17|1999 CanLII 13463 (QC CA)|142 CCC (3d) 561}}{{TheCourt}}
</ref>
A conditional agreement can still be an agreement.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Root|2200k|2008 ONCA 869 (CanLII)|241 CCC (3d) 125}}{{perONCA-H|Watt JA}}{{atL|2200k|70}}</ref>
The charge must identify the crime(s) planned.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Saunders|1fsvd|1990 CanLII 1131 (SCC)|[1990] 1 SCR 1020}}{{perSCC-H|McLachlin J}}</ref>
And it should generally identify the co-conspirators.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|TLB|g97pz|1989 CanLII 7210 (NS CA)|52 CCC (3d) 72}}{{perNSCA|Hart JA}}<br>
{{supra1|Root}}{{atL|2200k|69}}</ref>
It is a valid defence to establish that the accused pretended to agree to the conspiracy.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Delay|htwxc|1976 CanLII 1409|25 CCC (2d) 575}}{{perONCA|Jessup JA}}</ref>
The trier of fact must find "that the accused intended to enter into the agreement."<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Barbeau|1njv8|1996 CanLII 6391 (QC CA)|110 CCC (3d) 69}}{{atp|568}}<br>
</ref>
Conspiracy cannot be committed by way of an accused being reckless as to the object of the agreement.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Lessard|gckh4|1982 CanLII 3814 (QC CA)|10 CCC (3d) 61}}{{perQCCA|Bisson JA}}{{atp|86}}<br>
{{supra1|Lamontagne}}{{atp|576}} "one notes that the crime of conspiracy cannot be committed by mere recklessness as to the object of the agreement")<br>
</ref>
However, the accused can be liable where he is reckless as to the method of execution of the agreement.<ref>
{{supra2|1njv8|Barbeau}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Park|2524l|2009 ABQB 470 (CanLII)|465 AR 20}}{{perABQB|Ouellette J}} ("recklessness may only be applied with respect to the method of execution of the agreement")<br>
{{supra1|Lessard}}<br>
{{supra1|Lamontagne}}<br>
</ref>
Willful blindness can satisfy the ''mens rea'' requirement of conspiracy.<ref>
{{supra2|1njv8|Barbeau}}<br>
{{supra2|2524l|Park}} ("The ''mens rea'' requirement for conspiracy may be satisfied where willful blindness is established")<br>
</ref>
A party to an offence, including conspiracy "must have some knowledge of the essential nature of the offence to be committed, but not necessarily knowledge of all the details."<ref>
{{supra2|2524l|Park}}{{atps|569 to 571}}<br>
</ref>
Evidence of "how" the agreement is to be carried out, specifically to over acts to be taken are elements to the agreement element of the offence.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Douglas|1fsnr|1991 CanLII 81 (SCC)|[1991] 1 SCR 301}}{{perSCC|Cory J}}{{atL|1fsnr|28}} ("How that agreement is to be  carried out, that is to say, the steps taken in furtherance of the agreement (the overt acts) are simply elements going to the proof of the essential ingredient of the offence, namely the agreement.")
</ref>
{{Reflist|2}}
===Common Design===
There must be a "a common plan with a common objective."<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Cotroni, (sub nom. Papalia)|1tx7p|1979 CanLII 38 (SCC)|[1979] 2 SCR 256}}{{perSCC|Dickson J}}
</ref>
The Crown must establish that the accused had an intention to become a party to the common design with the knowledge of its implications.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Papalia|1tx7p|1979 CanLII 38 (SCC)|[1979] 2 SCR 256}}{{perSCC|Dickson J}} (“In addition to proof of common design, it was incumbent on the Crown to establish that each accused had the intention to become a party to that common design with knowledge of its implications.”)
</ref>
{{reflist|2}}
===Participation===
It is not required that it be proven that every member of the conspiracy be involved in its execution or that they were involved throughout the entire time. It is enough if the evidence "demonstrates that the conspiracy proven included some of the accused; establishes that it occurred at some time within the time frame alleged in the indictment; and had as its object the type of crime alleged."<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Douglas|1fsnr|1991 CanLII 81 (SCC)|[1991] 1 SCR 301}}{{perSCC|Cory J}}{{atL|1fsnr|41}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Papalia|1tx7p|1979 CanLII 38 (SCC)|[1979] 2 SCR 256}}{{perSCC|Dickson J}} ("The essence of criminal conspiracy is proof of agreement...")<br>
</ref>
A member of a conspiracy who refuses to execute the plan is still guilty.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|O'Brien|21v9k|1954 CanLII 42 (SCC)|[1954] SCR 666}}{{perSCC|Taschereau J}}{{atL|21v9k|4}}
</ref>
Involvement in only part of a whole plan will still be found guilty.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Shirose|1fqp4|1999 CanLII 676 (SCC)|[1999] 1 SCR 565}}{{perSCC-H|Binnie J}}</ref>
An accused cannot be convicted for attempted conspiracy.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Dery|1q1hs|2006 SCC 53 (CanLII)|[2006] 2 SCR 669}}{{perSCC-H|Fish J}} </ref>
{{Reflist|2}}
===Evidence===
Words of the co-conspirator are admissible against the accused. They are not hearsay and are rather the actus reus.<ref>
{{CanLIIR-N|Cook|(1984), 39 CR (3d) 300}} aff'd in [http://canlii.ca/t/1ftv8 1986 CanLII 47] (SCC), [1986] 1 SCR 144{{perSCC|Dickson CJ}}</ref>
Further, the co-conspirators exception to hearsay makes statements admissible against the accused.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Gassyt|6h3c|1998 CanLII 5976 (ON CA)|127 CCC (3d) 546}}{{perONCA|Charron JA}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Perciballi|1fbs7|2001 CanLII 13394|154 CCC (3d) 481}}{{perONCA|Charron JA}} aff'd in [http://canlii.ca/t/51ss 2002 SCC 51] (CanLII){{perSCC-H|McLachlin CJ}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Gagnon|1fbc2|2000 CanLII 16863 (ON CA)|147 CCC (3d) 193}}{{perONCA|Weiler JA}}<br>
</ref>
Statements by the co-conspirator that are not related to the conspiracy are not admissible against the accused.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Henke|2dr7n|1989 ABCA 263 (CanLII)|72 CR (3d) 395}}{{TheCourt}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Maugey|1fb79|2000 CanLII 8488 (ON CA)|146 CCC (3d) 99}}{{perONCA|Feldman JA}}<br>
</ref>
{{reflist|2}}
===Aiding and Abetting===
{{seealso|Parties to an Offence}}
There has been a divided line of case law on whether a conviction can be made for being a party to a conspiracy.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Park|2524l|2009 ABQB 470 (CanLII)|465 AR 20}}{{perABQB|Ouellette J}}{{atps|540 to 575}}<br>
{{CanLIIR-N|Taylor| (1984), 40 CR (3d) 222}}<br>
</ref>
The members of a conspiracy do not need to all play an equal role in the endeavour, nor do they need to personally commit the offence they have agreed. Any degree of assistance can create membership.<Ref>
{{CanLIIRP|JF|fwb36|2013 SCC 12 (CanLII)|[2013] 1 SCR 565}}{{perSCC| J}}{{atL|fwb36|54}} (...it is not necessary that all members of a conspiracy play, or intend to play, equal roles in the ultimate commission of the unlawful object.  Indeed, members in a conspiracy need not personally commit, or intend to commit, the offence which each has agreed should be committed:... Any degree of assistance in the furtherance of the unlawful object can lead to a finding of membership as long as agreement to a common plan can be inferred and the requisite mental state has been established.")<br>
</ref>
{{reflist|2}}
===Jurisdiction===
{{quotation2|
465<br>
{{removed|(1) and (2)}}
; Conspiracy to commit offences
(3) Every one who, while in Canada, conspires with any one to do anything referred to in subsection (1) {{AnnSec4|465(1)}} in a place outside Canada that is an offence under the laws of that place shall be deemed to have conspired to do that thing in Canada.
; Idem
(4) Every one who, while in a place outside Canada, conspires with any one to do anything referred to in subsection (1) {{AnnSec4|465(1)}} in Canada shall be deemed to have conspired in Canada to do that thing.
; Jurisdiction
(5) Where a person is alleged to have conspired to do anything that is an offence by virtue of subsection (3) {{AnnSec4|465(3)}} or (4) {{AnnSec4|465(4)}}, proceedings in respect of that offence may, whether or not that person is in Canada, be commenced in any territorial division in Canada, and the accused may be tried and punished in respect of that offence in the same manner as if the offence had been committed in that territorial division.
; Appearance of accused at trial
(6) For greater certainty, the provisions of this Act relating to
:(a) requirements that an accused appear at and be present during proceedings, and
:(b) the exceptions to those requirements,
apply to proceedings commenced in any territorial division pursuant to subsection (5) {{AnnSec4|465(5)}}.
; If previously tried outside Canada
(7) If a person is alleged to have conspired to do anything that is an offence by virtue of subsection (3) {{AnnSec4|465(3)}} or (4) {{AnnSec4|465(4)}} and that person has been tried and dealt with outside Canada in respect of the offence in such a manner that, if the person had been tried and dealt with in Canada, they would be able to plead autrefois acquit, autrefois convict, pardon or an expungement order under the ''Expungement of Historically Unjust Convictions Act'', the person shall be deemed to have been so tried and dealt with in Canada.
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 465;
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)}}, s. 61;
{{LegHistory90s|1998, c. 35}}, s. 121;
{{LegHistory10s|2018, c. 11}}, s. 28;
{{LegHistory10s|2019, c. 25}}, s. 183.
{{Annotation}}
|{{CCCSec2|465}}
|{{NoteUp|465|3|4|5|6|7}}
}}
===Defences===
{{quotation2|
; Saving
467 (1) No person shall be convicted of the offence of conspiracy by reason only that he
:(a) refuses to work with a workman or for an employer; or
:(b) does any act or causes any act to be done for the purpose of a trade combination, unless that act is an offence expressly punishable by law.
; Definition of trade combination
(2) In this section, trade combination means any combination between masters or workmen or other persons for the purpose of regulating or altering the relations between masters or workmen, or the conduct of a master or workman in or in respect of his business, employment or contract of employment or service.
<br>
R.S., c. C-34, s. 425.
|{{CCCSec2|467}}
|{{NoteUp|467|1|2}}
}}
==Participation of Third Parties==
{{seealso|Role of the Victim and Third Parties|Testimonial Aids for Young, Disabled or Vulnerable Witnesses}}
; Testimonial Aids
{{3rdPTestimonyAids}}
; On Finding of Guilt
{{VictimHeader}} <!-- Sections / Notice of Agree / Notice of Restitution / Notice of VIS -->
|s. 465(1)(a) {{DescrSec|465(1)(a)}},<br>s. 465(1)(b)(i) {{DescrSec|465(1)(b)(i)}},<br>s. 465(1)(b)(ii) {{DescrSec|465(1)(b)(ii)}},<br>s. 465(1)(c) {{DescrSec|465(1)(c)}},<br>s. 465(1)(d) {{DescrSec|465(1)(d)}} || || ||
|-
{{VictimEnd}}<!--
{{606Notice5Y|XX}}
{{606NoticeSPIO|XX}}
-->
{{RestitutionNotice}}
{{VISNotice}}
==Sentencing Principles and Ranges==
; Maximum Penalties
{{SProfileMaxHeader}}
{{SProfileMax|s. 465(1)(a) {{DescrSec|465(1)(a)}} | {{NA}} | {{MaxLife}} }}
{{SProfileMax|s.  465(1)(b)(i) {{DescrSec| 465(1)(b)(i)}} | {{NA}} | {{Max10Years}} }}
{{SProfileMax|s.  465(1)(b)(ii) {{DescrSec| 465(1)(b)(ii)}} | {{NA}} | {{Max5Years}} }}
{{SProfileMax|s.  465(1)(d) {{DescrSec| 465(1)(d)}} | {{NA}} | {{MaxSummary}} }}
{{SProfileEnd}}
{{MaxPenaltyIndictment|s. 465(1)(a), (b), and (c)|'''{{MaxLife}}''' under s. 465(1)(a), ''''{{Max10Years}}''' under s. 465(1)(b)(i), and '''{{Max5Years}}''' under s. 465(1)(b)(ii)}} Where prosecuted under s. 465(1)(c) the maximum penalty will match that of the index offence.
{{MaxPenaltySummary|s. 465(1)(d)|'''{{summaryconviction}}'''}}
; Minimum Penalties
{{NoMinimumPenalties}}
; Available Dispositions
{{SProfileAvailHeader}}
|s. 465(1)(a) {{DescrSec|465(1)(a)}} || {{NA}} || {{SProfileNoDischargeOrCSO}}
|-
|s. 465(1)(d) {{DescrSec|465(1)(d)}}|| {{NA}} || {{SProfileAll}}
|-
{{SProfileEnd}}
{{NoDischargeAvailable|s. 465(1)(a)}}
{{NoCSOAvailable|C|s. 465(1)(a)}}
; Consecutive Sentences
{{NoConsecutive}}
==Ancillary Sentencing Orders==
{{seealso|Ancillary Orders}}
; Offence-specific Orders
* Varies based on index offence
{{AOrderHeader}}
| [[DNA Orders]] ||s. 465(1)(b)(i), (ii) ||
* {{SecondDNA(AorB)|s. 465(1)(b)(i),(ii)}}
|-
| [[Delayed Parole Eligibility|Delayed Parole Order]] ||s. 465(1)(a) {{DescrSec|465(1)(a)}} ||
* {{ParoleDelayEligible|1|s. 465(1)(a) [conspiracy to commit murder]}}
|}
; General Sentencing Orders
{{GeneralSentencingOrders}}
; General Forfeiture Orders
{{GeneralForfeitureOrders}}
==Record Suspensions and Pardons==
{{RecordSuspension|s. 465 }}
==See Also==
* [[Parties to an Offence#Counselling]]

Version du 20 juin 2024 à 19:02

Ang

Fr

Cette page a été mise à jour ou révisée de manière substantielle pour la dernière fois January 2020. (Rev. # 2139)
n.b.: Cette page est expérimentale. Si vous repérez une grammaire ou un texte anglais clairement incorrect, veuillez m'en informer à [email protected] et je le corrigerai dès que possible.


Conspiracy
Art. 465 du
élection / plaidoyer
choix du mode de poursuite acte d’accusation (465(1)(b) and (c))
Summary (465(1)(d))
une procédure sommaire doit être initiée dans les 12 mois de l'infraction (786(2))
Jurisdiction s. 465(1)(b), (c):
Cour prov.

Cour sup. avec jury (*)
Cour sup. avec juge seul (*)
* Doit être inculpable. Enquête préliminaire également disponible.
s. 465(1)(a):
Sup. Court w/ Jury (*)
Sup. Court w/ Judge-alone (*)

* Preliminary inquiry also available.
s.465(1)(d):
Prov. Court only
dispositions sommaires
dispositions
disponible
Absolution (730)

ordonnances de probation (731(1)(a))
amende (734)
amende + probation (731(1)(b))
prison (718.3, 787)
prison + probation (731(1)(b))
prison + amende (734)

ordonnances de sursis (742.1)
minimum Aucun
maximum emprisonnement maximal de deux ans moins un jour ou d'une amende de 5 000 $ (du 19 septembre 2019)
disposition des
actes d'accusation
dispositions
disponible
Absolution (730)*

Ordonnances de probation (731(1)(a))
Amende (734)
Amende + Probation (731(1)(b))
prison (718.3, 787)
Prison + Probation (731(1)(b))
Prison + Amande (734)
Ordonnances de sursis (742.1)*

(* varie)
minimum Aucun
maximum 5, 10 years incarcération or Vie
Référence
Éléments d'infraction
résumé des cas de la peine

Overview

Les infractions liées à conspiracy se retrouvent à la partie XIII du Code criminel relative aux « Tentatives — Complots — Accessoires ».

Pleadings

Les infractions visées à l'article s. 465(1)(a) [complot en vue de commettre un meurtre] sont des infractions de compétence exclusive en vertu de l'article 469 et ne peuvent donc pas être jugées par un juge de la cour provinciale. Elles sont présumées être jugées par un juge et un jury.

Les infractions sous s. 465(1)(b) and (c) sont directement incriminables. Il existe une Élection de la Cour par la défense en vertu de l'art. 536(2).

Les infractions visées par la loi s. 465(1)(d) [complot en vue de commettre une infraction sommaire] sont des infractions punissables par condamnation par procédure sommaire. Le procès doit se dérouler devant un tribunal provincial.

Release
Infraction(s) Avis de comparution
par un agent de la paix

l'art. 497
Comparution obligatoire de l'accusé sans arrestation
l'art. 508(1), 512(1), ou 788
Liberer par un
agent de la paix
avec promesse

l'art. 498, 499, et 501
Mise en liberté provisoire
l'art. 515 à 519
Direct pour assister au test d'empreintes digitales, etc.
Loi sur l'identification des criminels

l'art. 2 ID des crim.
s. 465(1)(a), (b)
s. 465(1)(d) [complot en vue de commettre une infraction sommaire]

Lorsqu'il est inculpé en vertu du s. 465(1)(a), (b), l'accusé peut recevoir une citation à comparaître sans être arrêté. S'il est arrêté, il peut être libéré par l'officier qui l'a arrêté en vertu de l'article 498 ou 499 sur la base d'un engagement assorti ou non de conditionl'art. Il peut également être libéré par un juge en vertu de l'article 515.

Lorsqu'il est inculpé en vertu de s. 465(1)(d) [complot en vue de commettre une infraction sommaire] , l'accusé peut recevoir une avis de comparution sans être arrêté en vertu de l'art. 497 ou une sommation. S'il est arrêté, il peut être libéré par l'agent qui l'a arrêté conformément à l'art. 498 ou 499 sur un engagement avec ou sans conditionl'art. Il peut également être libéré par un juge en vertu de l'art. 515.

Reverse Onus Bail

Si la police décide de traduire l'accusé devant un juge conformément à l'art. 503, il y aura une présomption contre la mise en liberté sous caution (c'est-à-dire un inversion du fardeau de la preuve) si l'infraction, poursuivie par voie de mise en accusation, a été commise :

  • en liberté sous l'art. 515 [libération sous caution], 679 ou 680 [libération en attendant l'appel ou la révision de l'appel] (l'art. 515(6)(a)(i));
  • « au profit, sous la direction ou en association » avec une « organisation criminelle » (l'art. 515(6)(a)(ii));
  • lorsque l'infraction concernait une arme, à savoir une arme à feu, une arbalète, une arme prohibée, une arme à autorisation restreinte, un dispositif prohibé, des munitions, des munitions prohibées ou une substance explosive, alors que l'accusé faisait l'objet d'une ordonnance d'interdiction empêchant la possession de ces éléments (l'art. 515(6)(a)(viii)) ; ou
  • lorsque l'accusé n'est pas "un résident habituel du Canada" (l'art. 515(6)(b)).

Et, quel que soit le choix de la Couronne, si l’infraction alléguée en était une :

  • lorsque l'infraction était une allégation de violence contre un "partenaire intime" et l'accusé avait déjà été reconnu coupable d'une infraction de violence contre un "partenaire intime" ( l'art. 515(6)(b.1));
  • lorsque l'infraction alléguée est un manquement au sens de l'art. 145(2) à (5) tandis que (l'art. 515(6)(c));
  • lorsque l'infraction commise (ou conspirée pour commettre) était une infraction à l'art. 5 à 7 de la LRCDAS qui est passible de l'emprisonnement à perpétuité (l'art. 515(6)(d));
Publication Ban

Pour toutes les poursuites pénales ou réglementaires, il existe une interdiction générale discrétionnaire de publication, à la demande de la Couronne, de la victime ou du témoin, afin d'interdire la publication de "toute information susceptible d'identifier la victime ou le témoin" en vertu de l'article 486.5(1), lorsque cela est "nécessaire" à la "bonne administration de la justice". D'autres interdictions de publication sont possibles, notamment l'interdiction de publier des preuves ou d'autres informations résultant d'une audience de mise en liberté sous caution (article 517), d'une enquête préliminaire (article 539) ou d'un procès avec jury (article 648). Dans toutes les poursuites intentées contre des adolescents, il existe une interdiction obligatoire de publier les renseignements qui tendent à identifier les jeunes accusés en vertu de l'article 110 de la LSJPA ou les jeunes victimes en vertu de l'article 111 de la LSJPA.

Offence Designations
Infraction(s) Admissible à
l'écoute électronique

l'art. 183
Infraction désignée
comme délinquant dangereux

l'art. 752
Sévices graves
à la personne

l'art. 752
Consentement du
procureur général requis
Infraction criminelle
grave
l'art. 36 LIPR
s. 465(1)(a) [complot en vue de commettre un meurtre],
s. 465(1)(b)(i) [complot en vue de poursuivre une personne innocente, 14 ans ou perpétuité],
s. 465(1)(b)(ii) [complot en vue de poursuivre une personne innocente, moins de 14 ans],
s. 465(1)(c) [complot en vue de commettre un acte criminel],
s. 465(1)(d) [complot en vue de commettre une infraction sommaire]

Voir ci-dessous Ordres de condamnation annexes pour plus de détails sur les désignations relatives aux ordres de condamnation.

Offence Wording

Conspiracy

465 (1) Except where otherwise expressly provided by law, the following provisions apply in respect of conspiracy:

(a) every one who conspires with any one to commit murder or to cause another person to be murdered, whether in Canada or not, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a maximum term of imprisonment for life;
(b) every one who conspires with any one to prosecute a person for an alleged offence, knowing that they did not commit that offence, is guilty of
(i) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years or an offence punishable on summary conviction, if the alleged offence is one for which, on conviction, that person would be liable to be sentenced to imprisonment for life or for a term of not more than 14 years, or
(ii) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years or an offence punishable on summary conviction, if the alleged offence is one for which, on conviction, that person would be liable to imprisonment for less than 14 years;
(c) every one who conspires with any one to commit an indictable offence not provided for in paragraph (a) or (b) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to the same punishment as that to which an accused who is guilty of that offence would, on conviction, be liable; and
(d) every one who conspires with any one to commit an offence punishable on summary conviction is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

(2) [Repealed, 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 61]
[omis (3), (4), (5), (6) and (7)]
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 465; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 61; 1998, c. 35, s. 121; 2018, c. 11, s. 28; 2019, c. 25, s. 183.

CCC (CanLII), (Jus.)


Note: 465(1) et (2)

Conspiracy in restraint of trade

466 (1) A conspiracy in restraint of trade is an agreement between two or more persons to do or to procure to be done any unlawful act in restraint of trade.

Trade union, exception

(2) The purposes of a trade union are not, by reason only that they are in restraint of trade, unlawful within the meaning of subsection (1) [complot visant à restreindre le commerce].
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 466; 1992, c. 1, s. 60(F).
[annotation(s) ajoutée(s)]

CCC (CanLII), (Jus.)


Note: 466(1) et (2)

Draft Form of Charges

Voir également: Draft Form of Charges
Préambules
"QUE [nom complet de l'accusé] est accusé d'avoir, entre le <DATE> jour de <MOIS>, <ANNÉE> et le <DATE> jour de <MOIS>, <ANNÉE>***, à ou près de <COMMUNAUTÉ/VILLE/VILLE>, <PROVINCE>, ... " OU
« QUE [nom complet de l'accusé] est accusé d'avoir, le ou vers le <DATE> jour de <MOIS>, <ANNÉE>, à ou près de <COMMUNAUTÉ/VILLE/VILLE>, <PROVINCE>, ... » OU
"ET DE PLUS, au même moment et au même endroit précités, il [ou elle]..."
Article du Code Objet de l'infraction Projet de libellé
465 "... contrary to section 465 du Code Criminel."
466 "... contrary to section 466 du Code Criminel."

Proof of the Offence

Prouver conspiracy selon l'art. 465 doit inclure :[1]

  1. identité de l'accusé comme coupable
  2. date et heure de l'incident
  3. juridiction (y compris la région et la province)
  4. the words communicated in the conspiracy
  5. there was an agreement made between the parties
  6. the parties had an intention to agree to put a "common design into effect" and did in fact agree
  7. the parties did not change their minds or intention to put common design into effect
  1. R c Root, 2008 ONCA 869 (CanLII), 241 CCC (3d) 125, par Watt JA, au para 66

Interpretation

The purpose of criminalizing conspiracies is to "prevent an unlawful object" from being fulfilled and then "prevent[ing] serious harm from occurring". Parliament intended to intervene "earlier along the continuum of the increased danger represented by a cohort or wrongdoers acting in concert."[1]

A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to do an unlawful act.[2]

There must be an "intention to agree, the completion of an agreement and a common design."[3] The Crown needs only prove that there was "a meeting of the minds with regard to a common design to do something unlawful."[4]

To prove conspiracy the facts must satisfy a three-part Carter test:[5]

  1. has the Crown proven beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the conspiracy?
  2. has the Crown proven that the accused was on balance a member of the conspiracy?
  3. considering all of the evidence, including hearsay evidence, is the accused guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of being a member of the conspiracy?

trier of fact concludes on a balance of probabilities that the accused is a member of the conspiracy then [the trier] must go on and decide whether the Crown has established such membership beyond reasonable doubt. In this last step only, the trier of fact can apply the hearsay exception and consider evidence of acts and declarations of co-conspirators done in furtherance of the object of the conspiracy as evidence against the accused on the issue of his guilt.

A conspiracy must include (1) an agreement and (2) the unlawful objective or "common design."[6]

As well, the unlawful objective does not need to come about. It is the planning that is the criminal act.[7]

A conspiracy made over the telephone will occur within the jurisdiction of both calling parties.[8]

Both legal and factual impossibility are not defences to an allegation of conspiracy.[9]

It is not necessary to prove that the predicate offence was actually committed.[10]

The fact that the co-conspirators are unidentified does not result in a failure to prove the offence of conspiracy.[11]

  1. R c Dery, 2006 SCC 53 (CanLII), [2006] 2 SCR 669, par Fish J, au para 44
    R c Meyer, 2012 ONCJ 791 (CanLII), [2012] OJ No 6235, par Pacciocco J, au para 21("The law of conspiracy achieves this policy [of preventing serious harm from occurring] by allowing a pre-emptive strike where there is a true agreement to achieve a mutual criminal objective.")
  2. R c O'Brien, 1954 CanLII 42, [1954] SCR 666, par Taschereau J, aux pp. 668-9
    See: R c Paradis, 1933 CanLII 75 (SCC), [1934] SCR 165, par Rinfret J, au p. 186 - defines as two or more persons agreeing to act in concert in pursuit of a common goal
  3. United States of America v Dynar, 1997 CanLII 359 (SCC), [1997] 2 SCR 462, par Cory and Iacobucci JJ, au para 86
    R c Root, 2008 ONCA 869 (CanLII), [2008] OJ No 5214 (OCA), par Watt JA, au para 66
  4. Dynar, supra, au para 87
  5. R c Carter, 1982 CanLII 35 (SCC), [1982] 1 SCR 938, par McIntyre J
  6. O'Brien, supra, aux paras 2 to 3, ("It is of course, essential that the conspirators have the intention to agree, and this agreement must be complete ... there must exist an intention to put the common design into effect.")
    R c Root, 2008 ONCA 869 (CanLII), 241 CCC (3d) 125, par Watt JA
  7. O'Brien, supra, au para 4 ("The law punishes conspiracy so that the unlawful object is not attained. It considers that several persons who agree together to commit an unlawful act, are a menace to society, and even if they do nothing in furtherance of their common design, the state intervenes to exercise a repressive action, so that the intention is not materialized, and does not become harmful to any one.")
  8. R c Doucette, 2003 PESCAD 7 (CanLII), 666 APR 163, per Mitchell CJ
  9. Dynar, supra, au para 105 (It is not relevant whether "from an objective point of view, commission of the offence may be impossible.")
  10. See R c Koufis, 1941 CanLII 55 (SCC), [1941] SCR 481, 76 CCC 161 (SCC), par Taschereau J
    R c Beaven, 2013 SKQB 7 (CanLII), 411 Sask R 129, par Rothery J, au para 73
  11. Root, supra, au para 69

Agreement

The agreement is the essence of the offence of conspiracy.[1]

An agreement can be implied or tacit. It requires a meeting of the minds to create a common intention to commit an offence. The parties must have knowledge of a common goal and agreement to achieve it.[2]

There must be a "consensus to effect an unlawful purpose."[3]

It is not enough that there be a common intention.[4] Nor is passive acquiescence to a criminal plan sufficient[5] , knowledge of the plan[6] , or nor wilful blindness.

It is not a "formal agreement" and may be implicit.[7]

Where there is a pre-existing conspiracy, the accused must have adopted it or consented to participate in achieving the goal.[8]

A conditional agreement can still be an agreement.[9]

The charge must identify the crime(s) planned.[10] And it should generally identify the co-conspirators.[11]

It is a valid defence to establish that the accused pretended to agree to the conspiracy.[12]

The trier of fact must find "that the accused intended to enter into the agreement."[13]

Conspiracy cannot be committed by way of an accused being reckless as to the object of the agreement.[14] However, the accused can be liable where he is reckless as to the method of execution of the agreement.[15]

Willful blindness can satisfy the mens rea requirement of conspiracy.[16]

A party to an offence, including conspiracy "must have some knowledge of the essential nature of the offence to be committed, but not necessarily knowledge of all the details."[17]

Evidence of "how" the agreement is to be carried out, specifically to over acts to be taken are elements to the agreement element of the offence.[18]

  1. R c Papalia, 1979 CanLII 38 (SCC), [1979] 2 SCR 256, par Dickson J ("The essence of criminal conspiracy is proof of agreement...")
  2. Atlantic Sugar Refineries Co. v Canada (Attorney General), 1980 CanLII 226 (SCC), 54 CCC (2d) 373, [1980] 2 SCR 644, par Pigeon J
  3. Papalia, supra (“two or more persons pursued the same unlawful object at the same time or in the same place; it is necessary to show a consensus to effect an unlawful purpose. ”)
  4. R c O'Brien, 1954 CanLII 42, [1954] SCR 666, par Taschereau J
  5. R c McNamara, 1981 CanLII 3120 (ON CA), 56 CCC (2d) 193, par curiam at 452 ("Mere knowledge of, discussion of or passive acquiescence in a plan of criminal conduct is not, of itself, sufficient")
  6. Goode, Criminal Conspiracy in Canada (1975), p. 16
  7. Goode, Criminal Conspiracy in Canada (1975), p. 16
  8. R c Lamontagne, 1999 CanLII 13463 (QC CA), 142 CCC (3d) 561, par curiam
  9. R c Root, 2008 ONCA 869 (CanLII), 241 CCC (3d) 125, par Watt JA, au para 70
  10. R c Saunders, 1990 CanLII 1131 (SCC), [1990] 1 SCR 1020, par McLachlin J
  11. R c TLB, 1989 CanLII 7210 (NS CA), 52 CCC (3d) 72, par Hart JA
    Root, supra, au para 69
  12. R c Delay, 1976 CanLII 1409, 25 CCC (2d) 575, par Jessup JA
  13. R c Barbeau, 1996 CanLII 6391 (QC CA), 110 CCC (3d) 69, au p. 568
  14. R c Lessard, 1982 CanLII 3814 (QC CA), 10 CCC (3d) 61, par Bisson JA, au p. 86
    Lamontagne, supra, au p. 576 "one notes that the crime of conspiracy cannot be committed by mere recklessness as to the object of the agreement")
  15. Barbeau, supra
    R c Park, 2009 ABQB 470 (CanLII), 465 AR 20, par Ouellette J ("recklessness may only be applied with respect to the method of execution of the agreement")
    Lessard, supra
    Lamontagne, supra
  16. Barbeau, supra
    Park, supra ("The mens rea requirement for conspiracy may be satisfied where willful blindness is established")
  17. Park, supra, aux pp. 569 to 571
  18. R c Douglas, 1991 CanLII 81 (SCC), [1991] 1 SCR 301, par Cory J, au para 28 ("How that agreement is to be carried out, that is to say, the steps taken in furtherance of the agreement (the overt acts) are simply elements going to the proof of the essential ingredient of the offence, namely the agreement.")

Common Design

There must be a "a common plan with a common objective."[1]

The Crown must establish that the accused had an intention to become a party to the common design with the knowledge of its implications.[2]

  1. R c Cotroni, (sub nom. Papalia), 1979 CanLII 38 (SCC), [1979] 2 SCR 256, par Dickson J
  2. R c Papalia, 1979 CanLII 38 (SCC), [1979] 2 SCR 256, par Dickson J (“In addition to proof of common design, it was incumbent on the Crown to establish that each accused had the intention to become a party to that common design with knowledge of its implications.”)

Participation

It is not required that it be proven that every member of the conspiracy be involved in its execution or that they were involved throughout the entire time. It is enough if the evidence "demonstrates that the conspiracy proven included some of the accused; establishes that it occurred at some time within the time frame alleged in the indictment; and had as its object the type of crime alleged."[1]

A member of a conspiracy who refuses to execute the plan is still guilty.[2]

Involvement in only part of a whole plan will still be found guilty.[3]

An accused cannot be convicted for attempted conspiracy.[4]

  1. R c Douglas, 1991 CanLII 81 (SCC), [1991] 1 SCR 301, par Cory J, au para 41
    R c Papalia, 1979 CanLII 38 (SCC), [1979] 2 SCR 256, par Dickson J ("The essence of criminal conspiracy is proof of agreement...")
  2. R c O'Brien, 1954 CanLII 42 (SCC), [1954] SCR 666, par Taschereau J, au para 4
  3. R c Shirose, 1999 CanLII 676 (SCC), [1999] 1 SCR 565, par Binnie J
  4. R c Dery, 2006 SCC 53 (CanLII), [2006] 2 SCR 669, par Fish J

Evidence

Words of the co-conspirator are admissible against the accused. They are not hearsay and are rather the actus reus.[1]

Further, the co-conspirators exception to hearsay makes statements admissible against the accused.[2]

Statements by the co-conspirator that are not related to the conspiracy are not admissible against the accused.[3]

  1. R c Cook(1984), 39 CR (3d) 300(*pas de liens CanLII) aff'd in 1986 CanLII 47 (SCC), [1986] 1 SCR 144, par Dickson CJ
  2. R c Gassyt, 1998 CanLII 5976 (ON CA), 127 CCC (3d) 546, par Charron JA
    R c Perciballi, 2001 CanLII 13394, 154 CCC (3d) 481, par Charron JA aff'd in 2002 SCC 51 (CanLII), par McLachlin CJ
    R c Gagnon, 2000 CanLII 16863 (ON CA), 147 CCC (3d) 193, par Weiler JA
  3. R c Henke, 1989 ABCA 263 (CanLII), 72 CR (3d) 395, par curiam
    R c Maugey, 2000 CanLII 8488 (ON CA), 146 CCC (3d) 99, par Feldman JA

Aiding and Abetting

Voir également: Parties to an Offence

There has been a divided line of case law on whether a conviction can be made for being a party to a conspiracy.[1]

The members of a conspiracy do not need to all play an equal role in the endeavour, nor do they need to personally commit the offence they have agreed. Any degree of assistance can create membership.[2]

  1. R c Park, 2009 ABQB 470 (CanLII), 465 AR 20, par Ouellette J, aux pp. 540 to 575
    R c Taylor (1984), 40 CR (3d) 222(*pas de liens CanLII)
  2. R c JF, 2013 SCC 12 (CanLII), [2013] 1 SCR 565, par J, au para 54 (...it is not necessary that all members of a conspiracy play, or intend to play, equal roles in the ultimate commission of the unlawful object. Indeed, members in a conspiracy need not personally commit, or intend to commit, the offence which each has agreed should be committed:... Any degree of assistance in the furtherance of the unlawful object can lead to a finding of membership as long as agreement to a common plan can be inferred and the requisite mental state has been established.")

Jurisdiction

465
[omis (1) and (2)]

Conspiracy to commit offences

(3) Every one who, while in Canada, conspires with any one to do anything referred to in subsection (1) [complot – infraction] in a place outside Canada that is an offence under the laws of that place shall be deemed to have conspired to do that thing in Canada.

Idem

(4) Every one who, while in a place outside Canada, conspires with any one to do anything referred to in subsection (1) [complot – infraction] in Canada shall be deemed to have conspired in Canada to do that thing.

Jurisdiction

(5) Where a person is alleged to have conspired to do anything that is an offence by virtue of subsection (3) [complot réputé au Canada s'il est visé par le droit pénal étranger] or (4) [présence canadienne réputée lorsque l'autre personne se trouve au Canada], proceedings in respect of that offence may, whether or not that person is in Canada, be commenced in any territorial division in Canada, and the accused may be tried and punished in respect of that offence in the same manner as if the offence had been committed in that territorial division.

Appearance of accused at trial

(6) For greater certainty, the provisions of this Act relating to

(a) requirements that an accused appear at and be present during proceedings, and
(b) the exceptions to those requirements,

apply to proceedings commenced in any territorial division pursuant to subsection (5) [complot de compétence].

If previously tried outside Canada

(7) If a person is alleged to have conspired to do anything that is an offence by virtue of subsection (3) [complot réputé au Canada s'il est visé par le droit pénal étranger] or (4) [présence canadienne réputée lorsque l'autre personne se trouve au Canada] and that person has been tried and dealt with outside Canada in respect of the offence in such a manner that, if the person had been tried and dealt with in Canada, they would be able to plead autrefois acquit, autrefois convict, pardon or an expungement order under the Expungement of Historically Unjust Convictions Act, the person shall be deemed to have been so tried and dealt with in Canada.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 465; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 61; 1998, c. 35, s. 121; 2018, c. 11, s. 28; 2019, c. 25, s. 183.
[annotation(s) ajoutée(s)]

CCC (CanLII), (Jus.)


Note: 465(3), (4), (5), (6), et (7)

Defences

Saving

467 (1) No person shall be convicted of the offence of conspiracy by reason only that he

(a) refuses to work with a workman or for an employer; or
(b) does any act or causes any act to be done for the purpose of a trade combination, unless that act is an offence expressly punishable by law.
Definition of trade combination

(2) In this section, trade combination means any combination between masters or workmen or other persons for the purpose of regulating or altering the relations between masters or workmen, or the conduct of a master or workman in or in respect of his business, employment or contract of employment or service.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 425.

CCC (CanLII), (Jus.)


Note: 467(1) et (2)

Participation of Third Parties

Voir également: Role of the Victim and Third Parties et Testimonial Aids for Young, Disabled or Vulnerable Witnesses
Testimonial Aids

Certaines personnes qui témoignent ont le droit de demander l'utilisation d'aides au témoignage: Exclusion of Public (l'art. 486), Utilisation d'un écran de témoignage (l'art. 486), Accès à une personne de soutien pendant le témoignage (l'art. 486.1), Témoignage par lien vidéo à proximité (l'art. 486.2), Ordonnance d’interdiction de contre-interrogatoire par autoreprésentation (l'art. 486.3), et Ordonnance de sécurité des témoins (l'art. 486.7).

Un témoin, une victime ou un plaignant peut également demander une interdiction de publication (art. 486.4, 486.5) et/ou une ordonnance de non-divulgation de l'identité du témoin (art. 486.31). Voir également Interdictions de publication, ci-dessus ici.

On Finding of Guilt
Article(s) Avis d'entente
à la victime
l'art. 606(4.1)
[SPIO]
La victime est interrogée
sur son intérêt pour l'accord
l'art. 606(4.2)
[5+ ans]
Avis d'entente
à la dédommagement
l'art. 737.1
Avis de déclaration
d'impact à la victime
l'art. 722(2)
s. 465(1)(a) [complot en vue de commettre un meurtre],
s. 465(1)(b)(i) [complot en vue de poursuivre une personne innocente, 14 ans ou perpétuité],
s. 465(1)(b)(ii) [complot en vue de poursuivre une personne innocente, moins de 14 ans],
s. 465(1)(c) [complot en vue de commettre un acte criminel],
s. 465(1)(d) [complot en vue de commettre une infraction sommaire]

Sous l'art. 738, un juge doit demander au ministère public avant de prononcer la peine si « des mesures raisonnables ont été prises pour donner aux victimes la possibilité d'indiquer si elles demandent restitution pour leurs pertes et dommages ».

Sous l'art. 722(2), le juge doit demander « dès que possible » avant de prononcer la peine auprès de la Couronne « si des mesures raisonnables ont été prises pour donner à la victime la possibilité de préparer » une déclaration de la victime . Cela comprendra toute personne « qui a subi, ou est soupçonnée d'avoir subi, un préjudice physique ou émotionnel, un dommage matériel ou une perte économique » à la suite de l'infraction. Les individus représentant une communauté touchée par le crime peuvent déposer une déclaration en vertu de l'art. 722.2.

Sentencing Principles and Ranges

Maximum Penalties
Infraction(s) Élection
de la couronne
Pénalité maximale
s. 465(1)(a) [complot en vue de commettre un meurtre] N/A incarcération à vie
s. 465(1)(b)(i) [complot en vue de poursuivre une personne innocente, 14 ans ou perpétuité] N/A 10 ans d'emprisonnement
s. 465(1)(b)(ii) [complot en vue de poursuivre une personne innocente, moins de 14 ans] N/A 5 ans d'emprisonnement
s. 465(1)(d) [complot en vue de commettre une infraction sommaire] N/A emprisonnement maximal de deux ans moins un jour ou d'une amende de 5 000 $ (du 19 septembre 2019)

Les infractions en vertu de l'art. s. 465(1)(a), (b), and (c) sont directement passibles d'une mise en accusation. La peine maximale est de incarcération à vie under s. 465(1)(a), '10 ans d'emprisonnement under s. 465(1)(b)(i), and 5 ans d'emprisonnement under s. 465(1)(b)(ii). Where prosecuted under s. 465(1)(c) the maximum penalty will match that of the index offence.

Offences under s. 465(1)(d) are straight summary conviction offences. The maximum penalty is emprisonnement maximal de deux ans moins un jour ou d'une amende de 5 000 $ (du 19 septembre 2019).

Minimum Penalties

Ces infractions ne sont pas assorties de peines minimales obligatoires.

Available Dispositions
Offence(s) Choix du
mode de poursuite
Absolution
l'art. 730
Ordonnances de
probation

l'art. 731(1)(a)
Amendes
autonome

l'art. 731(1)(b)
Détenues sous garde
l'art. 718.3, 787
Détenues sous garde and
Probation
l'art. 731(1)(b)
Détenues sous garde and
Amende
l'art. 734
Ordonnances
du sursis
(ODS)
l'art. 742.1
s. 465(1)(a) [complot en vue de commettre un meurtre] N/A
s. 465(1)(d) [complot en vue de commettre une infraction sommaire] N/A

En cas de condamnation en vertu de s. 465(1)(a), une libération n'est pas disponible en vertu de l'art. 730(1) car il s'agit d'une « infraction pour laquelle une peine minimale est prévue par la loi ou d'une infraction punissable d'emprisonnement de quatorze ans ou de la réclusion à perpétuité ».

Les infractions en vertu de s. 465(1)(a) ne sont pas « éligibles » à une ordonnances de sursis en vertu de l'art. 742.1(c), lorsqu'il est poursuivi par mise en accusation, la période maximale d'incarcération étant de 14 ans ou à perpétuité.

Consecutive Sentences

Il n'y a aucune exigence légale selon laquelle les peines doivent être consécutives.

Ancillary Sentencing Orders

Voir également: Ancillary Orders
Offence-specific Orders
  • Varies based on index offence
Ordonnances Condamnation Description
DNA Orders s. 465(1)(b)(i), (ii)
Delayed Parole Order s. 465(1)(a) [complot en vue de commettre un meurtre]
  • Les périodes d'emprisonnement de 2 ans ou plus pour des condamnations en vertu de s. 465(1)(a) [conspiracy to commit murder] sont admissibles à une ordonnance de libération conditionnelle différée en vertu de l'art. 743.6(1) exigeant que le délinquant purge au moins « la moitié de la peine ou dix ans, selon la durée la plus courte », « lorsque la dénonciation de l'infraction ou l'objectif de dissuasion spécifique ou générale l'exige ».
General Sentencing Orders
Ordonnance Condamnation Description
Ordonnance de non-communication pendant la détention du délinquant (l'art. 743.21) tout Le juge a le pouvoir discrétionnaire d'ordonner qu'il soit interdit au contrevenant « de communiquer... avec une victime, un témoin ou une autre personne » pendant sa détention, sauf s'il « estime [qu'il] est nécessaire » de communiquer avec eux.
Ordonnances de restitution (l'art. 738) tout Une ordonnance discrétionnaire est disponible pour des éléments tels que la valeur de remplacement de la propriété ; les dommages matériels résultant d'un préjudice, de frais de fuite d'un conjoint ; ou certaines dépenses découlant de la commission d'une infraction aux articles 402.2 ou 403.
Suramende pour la victime (l'art. 737) tout Une surtaxe discrétionnaire au titre de l'art. 737 de 30 % de toute amende imposée, de 100 $ par déclaration de culpabilité par procédure sommaire ou de 200 $ par déclaration de culpabilité par acte criminel. Si l'infraction survient à compter du 23 octobre 2013, l'ordonnance comporte des montants minimums plus faibles (15 %, 50 $ ou 100 $).
General Forfeiture Orders
Confiscation Condamnation Description
Confiscation des produits de la criminalité (art. 462.37(1) ou (2.01)) tout Lorsque la culpabilité est établie pour un acte criminel en vertu du Code ou de la LRCDAS et que les biens sont des " produits de la criminalité " et que l'infraction a été " commise à l'égard de ces biens ", les biens sont confisqués au profit de Sa Majesté le Roi à la demande de la Couronne. NB : ne s'applique pas aux infractions sommaires.
L'amende tenant lieu de confiscation (art. 462.37(3)) tout Lorsqu'une Cour est convaincue qu'une ordonnance de confiscation des produits de la criminalité en vertu de l'article 462.37(1) ou (2.01) peut être rendue, mais que les biens ne peuvent pas être "soumis à une ordonnance", la Cour "peut" ordonner une amende d'un "montant égal à la valeur des biens". En cas de non-paiement de l'amende, un jugement par défaut imposant une période d'incarcération sera rendu.
La confiscation d'armes et d'armes à feu (art. 491). 491) tout Lorsqu'il y a déclaration de culpabilité pour une infraction où une "arme, une imitation d'arme à feu, un dispositif prohibé, toute munition, toute munition prohibée ou une substance explosive a été utilisée lors de la commission de [l'] infraction et que cette chose a été saisie et détenue", ou "qu'une personne a commis une infraction qui implique, ou dont l'objet est une arme à feu, une arbalète, une arme prohibée, une arme à autorisation restreinte, un dispositif prohibé, des munitions, des munitions prohibées ou une substance explosive a été saisi et détenu, que l'objet est une arme énumérée ou que l'objet connexe est lié à l'infraction", alors il y aura une ordonnance de confiscation "obligatoire". Cependant, en vertu de l'article 491(2), si le propriétaire légitime "n'a pas participé à l'infraction" et que le juge n'a "aucun motif raisonnable de croire que l'objet serait ou pourrait être utilisé pour commettre une infraction", l'objet doit être restitué au propriétaire légitime.
Confiscation de biens infractionnels (art. 490. 1) tout En cas de déclaration de culpabilité pour un acte criminel, " tout bien est un bien infractionnel " lorsque a) un acte criminel est commis en vertu de la présente loi ou de la Loi sur la corruption d'agents publics étrangers, b) il est utilisé de quelque manière que ce soit dans le cadre de la perpétration d'une telle infraction, ou c) il est destiné à être utilisé dans le cadre de la perpétration d'une telle infraction. Ces biens doivent être confisqués au profit de Sa Majesté du chef de la province. NB : ne s'applique pas aux infractions sommaires.

Record Suspensions and Pardons

Les condamnations au titre de s. 465 peuvent faire l'objet d'une suspension du casier conformément aux articles 3 et 4 de la Loi sur le casier judiciaire 5 ans après l'expiration de la peine pour les infractions punissables sur déclaration de culpabilité par procédure sommaire et 10 ans après l'expiration de la peine pour toutes les autres infractionl'art. Le délinquant ne peut pas voir son casier suspendu s'il a été (1) reconnu coupable d'au moins trois infractions passibles d'une peine maximale d'emprisonnement à perpétuité, et (2) pour chacune de ces trois infractions, il a été "condamné à une peine d'emprisonnement de deux ans ou plus".(Traduit par Google Traduction)

See Also