Avis de peine majorée

Ang

Fr

Cette page a été mise à jour ou révisée de manière substantielle pour la dernière fois janvier 2015. (Rev. # 6742)

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.

• < Détermination de la peine
• < Procédure de détermination de la peine

Principes généraux

Certaines infractions imposent des peines plus sévères en cas de condamnation préalable pour une infraction identique ou similaire. La peine plus élevée ne peut être demandée que si la Couronne a donné avis de son intention de demander une peine plus lourde.

Les infractions pour lesquelles cela s'applique comprennent :

• use firearm (s. 85)
• careless storage of a firearm (86)
• possession firearm (92)
• betting, pool-selling, bookmaking (202)
• placing bets on other’s behalf (203)
• impaired driving and over 80 (253)
• refusal (254)

By failing to give proper notice the Crown cannot rely upon the legislated mandatory minimums. However, a judge may still consider the prior record when sentencing and can impose the mandatory minimum as long as it is in the range of sentence.

Notice applies not only for increased jail penalties but also ancillary orders such as driving prohibitions under s. 259 and weapons prohibitions under s. 109/110.

Les paragraphes 4(6) à (7) traitent de l’exigence de preuve pour l’avis et la signification en vertu du Code :

4
[omis (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5)]

Preuve de signification

(6) Pour l’application de la présente loi, la signification de tout document ou la remise ou l’envoi de tout avis peut être prouvé :

a) oralement sous serment ou par l’affidavit ou la déclaration solennelle de la personne qui l’a effectué;

b) par la déclaration écrite d’un agent de la paix portant qu’il a signifié le document ou remis ou envoyé l’avis, cette déclaration étant réputée être faite sous serment.

Preuve de signification conforme aux lois provinciales

(6.1) Par dérogation au paragraphe (6) [preuve de notifications et de signification de documents], la preuve de la signification de tout document peut se faire en conformité avec le droit provincial applicable à la poursuite des infractions provinciales.

Présence pour interrogatoire

(7) Malgré les paragraphes (6) [preuve de notifications et de signification de documents] et (6.1) [preuve de signification conformément aux lois provinciales], le tribunal peut demander à la personne qui semble avoir signé un affidavit, une déclaration solennelle ou une déclaration écrite conforme à l’un de ces paragraphes d’être présente pour interrogatoire ou contre-interrogatoire sur la preuve de la signification ou de la remise ou de l’envoi de l’avis.

Moyens de télécommunication

(8) Pour l’application de la présente loi, il est entendu que, dans le cadre de la perpétration d’une infraction comportant explicitement ou implicitement un élément de communication sans en préciser le moyen, la communication peut se faire notamment par tout moyen de télécommunication.

L.R. (1985), ch. C-46, art. 4L.R. (1985), ch. 27 (1er suppl.), art. 3; 1994, ch. 44, art. 3; 1997, ch. 18, art. 2; 2008, ch. 18, art. 1; 2014, ch. 31, art. 2;
[annotation(s) ajoutée(s)]

– CCC (CanLII), (Jus.)

---

Les articles 4(6) à (7) s'appliqueront également à la signification et à l'avis concernant les Preuves d'expert, l'avis d'admission d'un certificat d'analyse en vertu de l'article 258, les assignations à comparaître et les assignations.

Notice

Notice of increased penalty is governed by s. 727(1):

Previous conviction

727 (1) Subject to subsections (3) [avis de condamnation antérieure non nécessaire en cas de déclaration de culpabilité par procédure sommaire ex parte] and (4) [avis de condamnation antérieure non nécessaire en cas de déclaration de culpabilité d'une organisation], where an accused or a defendant is convicted of an offence for which a greater punishment may be imposed by reason of previous convictions, no greater punishment shall be imposed on him by reason thereof unless the prosecutor satisfies the court that the accused or defendant, before making his plea, was notified that a greater punishment would be sought by reason thereof.
[omis (2), (3), (4) and (5)]
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 727; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 160; 1995, c. 22, s. 6; 2003, c. 21, s. 16.
[annotation(s) ajoutée(s)]

– CCC (CanLII), (Jus.)

---

The section requires the crown to give notice to the accused before they can rely on any penalty that requires prior convictions. The governing requirements are (1) the timing of the notice and (2) the sufficiency of the notice.

Notice must be given to the accused of the Crown's intention to seek a greater penalty for past offences.

Timing

As specifically stated in s. 727(1), notice must be given before a plea is made.

There is no need for “reasonable notice”. So notice can be given on the day of trial.

Form of Notice

It is not sufficient to notify the accused that the Crown “may” be seeking a greater punishment.

It is not necessary to notify the accused of the nature and character of the penalty sought, including the length of the possible jail sentence.

Although it is generally practiced, it is not necessary to specify the previous convictions being relied upon when giving notice.

Service of Notice

Section 727(1) does not specifically require written notice, thus, both written or verbal notice is sufficient.

There is divided cases on whether the accused must be served personally or whether service on the agent or counsel is sufficient. The dominant opinion however has been that service of notice upon counsel is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of s.727(1) and that personal service is not necessary. In select jurisdictions, such as Saskatchewan, it has been determined that service upon an agent, including a relative, is also sufficient.

Reviewability of Crown's Discretion

The choice of providing notice of increased penalty is a function of the core discretion of the Crown.Prior to settling this issue, there were two lines of cases on the issue of whether the notice is discretionary on the judge to accept. This turns on whether the notice is part of the core prosecutorial duties which are not reviewable by a court absent evidence of abuse of process or bad faith.

Cases in support of the crown discretion view suggest that to do otherwise would create too much second-guessing and erode the boundary between the separation of powers.

The Crown is under no constitutional obligation to consider the accused's aboriginal status when determining whether to rely on a mandatory minimum set by

Failure to Provide Notice

Where the crown does not serve proper notice under s. 727, then the accused cannot be said to have been convicted "of an offence that is punishable by a minimum term of imprisonment" under s.742.1, and so would not disqualify the offender from being subject to a conditional sentence.

The Crown may still seek greater penalties equal or greater than the one specified in the offence, it only cannot rely upon the increased mandatory minimums.

Even without notice, under s. 727(3), the court may still impose an increased penalty after hearing evidence of the prior criminal record:

727
[omis (1) and (2)]

Where hearing ex parte

(3) Where a summary conviction court holds a trial pursuant to subsection 803(2) [summary offences – conduct ex parte trial or issue appearance warrant] and convicts the offender, the court may, whether or not the offender was notified that a greater punishment would be sought by reason of a previous conviction, make inquiries and hear evidence with respect to previous convictions of the offender and, if any such conviction is proved, may impose a greater punishment by reason thereof.
[omis (4) and (5)]
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 727; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 160; 1995, c. 22, s. 6; 2003, c. 21, s. 16.
[annotation(s) ajoutée(s)]

– CCC (CanLII), (Jus.)

---

Applicability of Prior Youth Record

A youth record with a prior conviction may be used as a prior criminal conviction for the purposes of increased penalty where the index offence has occurred within 5 years of the youth conviction.

Calculation of Previous Offences

Increased penalties for subsequent penalties must be calculated from the number of prior convictions that exist on the day of the index offence.

That means that on sentencing day for the index offence, you can only count convictions that were entered before the offence day. Convictions that post-date the index offence date do not count.

However, convictions entered on the same day will not count as a single instance. The calculation is the total number of prior convictions as of the day of the incident and nothing else.

An offender is not liable to an increased penalty for a "subsequent" offence where the offence occurred before the prior conviction was entered, but after the prior offence had occurred.

Previous convictions is not calculated on the number of times that s. 665 is invoked by the Crown.

Proving Prior Record

Where the accused does not admit their prior record, the Crown must prove the existence of the record.

Section 727(2) states:

727
[omis (1)]

Procedure

(2) Where an offender is convicted of an offence for which a greater punishment may be imposed by reason of previous convictions, the court shall, on application by the prosecutor and on being satisfied that the offender was notified in accordance with subsection (1) [avis de peine aggravée en raison d'une condamnation antérieure], ask whether the offender was previously convicted and, if the offender does not admit to any previous convictions, evidence of previous convictions may be adduced.
[omis (3), (4) and (5)]
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 727; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 160; 1995, c. 22, s. 6; 2003, c. 21, s. 16.
[annotation(s) ajoutée(s)]

– CCC (CanLII), (Jus.)

---

Where the accused acknowledges his prior record during his testimony, this will be sufficient proof of the record at the sentencing stage.

Topics Related to Notice

• Proof of Controlled Substance#Notice to Admit the Certificate