FILAC F Facts: address and summarize the most crucial facts that are necessary to outlining the case I Issue: the matter/question that the court must make a decision about L Law: summary of the law that is relevant to the specific case under consideration A Analysis: how the law applies to the particular facts of the case under consideration C Conclusion: the ultimate decision of the court concerning to the matter in issue Introductory Overview of the Legal System Legal system - A structure of established legal rules and procedures aimed at realizing a policy objective Ex. Policy objective of criminal law: to uphold and maintain the administration of justice in Canada (key element: ensuring public safety) - What is “justice”? Protect society and manage safety risks to victims, witnesses, and general public Balance the public interest and individual rights Ensure fairness in the criminal court process by respecting the rights of accused and by giving victims the opportunity to have their voices heard Engage in the adversarial process to explore the strengths and weaknesses of the case while ensuring the case is addressed in a timely manner Balancing societal interests with individual rights - Adversarial process - KEY: the individuals within the criminal justice system must act within their role. - Police 警察: investigate the case and provide accurate info - Defence 辩护: fearlessly raise every argument - Crown 检察官: fairly present the evidence - Trier of Fact 法官或陪审团: assess each case on the totality of the evidence and apply legal standards as appropriate - Expert 专家: present opinion with neutrality “Common law”司法先例 “found” in case law, authority from cases not statute Statute 成文法 written law (legislation), provides definitions for terms and rules that can be further clarified (ex. Litigated) in cases Common law and statute inform each other, work together STEPS IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM FLOWCHART see lec1 p7 1. Police Investigation and Arrest a) police formed reasonable grounds to arrest accused b) accused is then either released on an OIC (officer in charge) undertaking or is presented in court for bail 2. Disclosure a) police collect info and provide it to the Crown, which has a duty to disclose it to the defence b) disclosure required to make full answer and defence 3. CPTs, JPTs, GPs, and Trials a) CPT: Crown Pre-Trial b) JPT: Judicial Pre-Trial c) GP: Guilty Plea d) Trial: Witnesses called to provide evidence What constitutes a valid arrest To arrest, the police officer must have reasonable and probable grounds that the person to be arrested committed the offence (R. v. Storrey, [1990] 1 SCR 241): 1) Subjective reasonable and probable grounds 2) Those reasonable and probable grounds must be justifiable from an objective point of view (standard of the reasonable person) Section 10 of the Charter: key concepts When a person is arrested, police are obligated to inform that person of their Section 10 Charter rights: 1) Advise of what the accused is being arrested of – s. 10(a) of Charter: right of person to be told of reason they are arrested/detained 必须告知被逮捕的理由 2) Right to counsel provided – s. 10(b) of Charter: right to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of the right 必须告知有权利找律师 On arrest, an individual is charged with a criminal offence. Being charged with a criminal offence trigger certain rights. Enforcement Enforcement of guaranteed rights and freedoms Exclusion of evidence bringing administration of justice into disrepute Section 24(2) FRAMEWORK IN R. V. GRANT, 2009 SCC 32 Question inherent in the statute: would admitting the evidence bring the administration of justice into disrepute? Three-part test to determine whether the impugned evidence should be excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter: 1) Seriousness of the Charter infringing state conduct a) What is the severity of the state conduct that led to the Charter breach? i. Breach willful or deliberate v. officers acting in good faith 2) Impact on the Charter protected interests of the accused a) How intrusive was the Charter breach to the accused’s privacy? b) Consider impact on right not to be forced to self-incriminate and the effect on the accused’s human dignity 3) Society’s interest in the case being adjudicated on its merits a) How reliable is the evidence considering the nature of the Charter Breach? b) Is there a public interest in the case being adjudicated on its merits? THE APPLICATION OF THE CHARTER – SECTION 32 S. 32 sets out the application of the Charter. The Charter applies to: 1) Parliament and the Canadian government (ex. Federal) 2) The provincial legislatures and governments (ex. Provincial) 3) The matters within the authority of the Federal and Provincial governments The point? - The Charter ONLY applies to governments and matters within their authority - The Charter does NOT apply to private individuals, businesses, or other organizations Can Charter rights be limited? Yes! Section 1 allows reasonable limitations on the rights of the Charter, as per the “Oakes Test” The Oakes Test: the limitation must have a “pressing and substantial objective” and can be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society”. DISCLOSURE: “FRUITS OF THE INVESTIGATION” (FIRST PARTY DISCLOSURE) Key Case: R. v. Stinchcombe, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 326 - The Crown (prosecution) has a duty to provide the accused with all relevant info arising from the criminal investigation so the accused can make full answer and defence - - Some limited exceptions affecting disclosure: Protection of victim and witness privacy Protection of informant identity Duties connected to the Crown’s duty to disclose: Police have a duty to collect evidence Police have a duty to preserve evidence ACCESS TO DISCLOSURE GUARANTEED BY S.7 OF THE CHARTER What info is “relevant”? - Stinchcombe, at pp. 345-346, “[i]f the information is of some use then it is relevant and the determination as to whether it is sufficiently useful to put into evidence should be made by the defence and not by the prosecutor.” - Note: Relevance is assessed in the context of the whole case and the positions of counsel. - Access to disclosure guaranteed by s.7 of the Charter - If evidence is not collected and preserved, an accused’s s.7 rights are violated, and the court may order a remedy. Ex.: new trial, stay of proceedings R. V. PASCAL, 2020 ONCA 287 The Crown is obligated to disclose criminal records and the outstanding charges of witnesses in unrelated police investigations laid by the investigating police service as “first party” disclosure. Meaning? CR + Outstanding Charges = Must disclose without defence counsel requesting it. Crown seeking leave to appeal to SCC (Supreme Court of Canada) THE TRIAL: “WHAT HAPPENED?” Offences may be “summary”, “hybrid”, or “indictable” - Relates to the jurisdiction of the court, seriousness of offence and potential sentencing consequences - Summary: Maximum sentence can be two years. Jury trial not an option. - Hybrid: Crown will elect whether to proceed summarily or by indictment - Indictable: If convicted, jail time typically greater than two years. Served in federal penitentiary. Some indictable offences can carry of potential maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Crown Onus: essential elements must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt for the accused to be found guilty Crown will call evidence to prove the facts in issue In evaluating all the available evidence, it is the trier of fact (judge or jury) who determines what is indeed fact. On those facts, the trier of fact will find a verdict of either: guilty or not guilty “Essential elements” of the offence - Essential elements = act + intent - Acts (Actus Reus): the act/actions that the offence is based upon Act described in Criminal Code, which creates the offence - Intent (Mens Rea): requirement to prove mental element of offence Addresses the accused’s state of mind at the time of the offence Ex. Mischief 430 (1) Everyone commits mischief who willfully (a) Destroys or damages property; (b) Renders property dangerous, useless, inoperative or ineffective; (c) Obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property; or (d) Obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property. Actus Reus: set out in situations described in s. 430 (1)(a)-(d) Mens Rea: “Willfully” WELL-ESTABLISHED LEGAL PRINCIPLES APPLICABLE TO ALL CRIMINAL TRIALS Judges must decide trials based on well-established principles, applied to the specific facts and circumstances of the case: 1) A criminal trial is not a credibility contest between witnesses a) The trier of fact can believe all, some, or none of the evidence given by a witness 2) The accused is presumed to be innocent 3) The onus of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt rest always with the Crown a) Guilt proven beyond a reasonable doubt = very high standard THE TRIAL: STANDARD OF PROOF Standard of proof = “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” R. v. Lifchus, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 320 at para. 39 - Not an imaginary or frivolous doubt - Based on reason and common sense - Logically derived from evidence or absence of evidence - Probably guilty or likely guilty not sufficient - BUT, virtually impossible to prove anything to an absolute certainty - Convict IF “you are sure that the accused committed the offence” Introductory Overview of Evidence Law What is “EVIDENCE”? Evidence = Proof. Admitted into court because it is relevant to a fact in issue or legal argument - Both the prosecution and the defence can submit evidence - All relevant evidence should be admitted “Trier of fact” = could be a judge (judge alone trial) or jury (jury trial) - It is the job of the trier of fact to decide what the facts are after hearing all of the available evidence Evidence may be “direct evidence” or “circumstantial evidence” but both are considered equal - Direct: what witnesses saw or heard (but must have been heard directly – otherwise it is hearsay and inadmissible) - Circumstantial: indirect evidence relied upon to draw logical inferences
