INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
If an accused is ordered to stand trial for an offense that could be tried by a judge without a jury, they will be deemed to have elected a trial by a court consisting of a judge and jury if certain conditions are met.
SECTION WORDING
565(1) Subject to subsection (1.1), if an accused is ordered to stand trial for an offence that, under this Part, may be tried by a judge without a jury, the accused shall, for the purposes of the provisions of this Part relating to election and re-election, be deemed to have elected to be tried by a court composed of a judge and jury if (a) the accused was ordered to stand trial by a provincial court judge who, pursuant to subsection 555(1), continued the proceedings before him as a preliminary inquiry; (b) the justice, provincial court judge or judge, as the case may be, declined pursuant to section 567 to record the election or re-election of the accused; or (c) the accused does not elect when put to an election under section 536.
EXPLANATION
Section 565(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the circumstances under which an accused person will be deemed to have elected for a trial to be conducted by a court composed of a judge and jury. This provision is applicable in cases where the offence under question may be tried by a judge without a jury. The section specifies that an accused person will be deemed to have elected for a trial by judge and jury if the following conditions are met: - The accused was ordered to stand trial by a provincial court judge who continued the proceedings as a preliminary inquiry, as per subsection 555(1). This means that the accused has gone through a preliminary hearing before a judge that has been deemed insufficient to warrant a trial by judge alone. - The justice, provincial court judge, or judge declined to record the election or re-election of the accused as per section 567. Essentially, the accused was given the option to choose to be tried by judge and jury or by judge alone, but failed to make a choice. - The accused does not make an election when put to an election under section 536. This means that the accused was given a straightforward option to choose to be tried by judge and jury or by judge alone, and failed to make a choice. In summary, section 565(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada ensures that in certain circumstances, an accused person will be tried by a judge and jury instead of a judge alone, regardless of whether they made an election to do so. This provision is in place to protect the rights and interests of all parties involved in a criminal trial.
COMMENTARY
Section 565(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the election process for trials that may be tried by a judge without a jury. It specifies that if an accused is ordered to stand trial for such an offense, they will be deemed to have elected to be tried by a court composed of a judge and jury if certain conditions are met. The first condition is if the accused was ordered to stand trial by a provincial court judge who continued the proceedings before them as a preliminary inquiry. This means that if the judge who conducted the preliminary inquiry decided that the case should proceed to trial, the accused will be deemed to have elected to be tried by a judge and jury. The second condition is if the justice, provincial court judge, or judge declined to record the election or re-election of the accused. This means that if the accused, at some point during the process, elected to be tried by a judge alone but the judicial officer declined to record that election, the accused will be deemed to have elected to be tried by a judge and jury. The third and final condition is if the accused does not elect when put to an election under section 536. Section 536 provides that an accused may choose to be tried by a judge alone or a judge and jury. If the accused does not make a choice, they will be deemed to have elected to be tried by a judge and jury. This section of the Criminal Code of Canada ensures that accused persons are not able to avoid a jury trial by defaulting to a trial by judge alone. It also ensures that the election process is clear and transparent, and that judicial officers are required to record an accused person's election to be tried by a judge alone. Overall, Section 565(1) serves to maintain the integrity and fairness of the criminal justice system by allowing for trials that are heard by peers of the accused. It also promotes transparency and clarity in the election process, which can help to avoid confusion or disputes later on in the trial process.
STRATEGY
Section 565(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the election and re-election of an accused who is ordered to stand trial for an offence that can be tried by a judge without a jury. This provision creates a presumption that the accused has elected to be tried by a court composed of a judge and jury in certain circumstances. When dealing with this section of the Criminal Code, there are several strategic considerations that must be taken into account. One of the main considerations is whether or not the accused wants to be tried by a judge and jury. If the accused wants to be tried by a judge alone, they must ensure that they make a valid election to that effect. Failure to do so may result in a trial by judge and jury, which may not be in the best interests of the accused. If the accused wants to be tried by a judge and jury, they must ensure that they do not make a valid election to be tried by a judge alone. They must also consider whether or not a jury trial is strategically advantageous in their case. For example, if the accused is facing a serious charge with a potentially lengthy sentence, a jury trial may be beneficial as it may be easier to convince a jury to acquit than a judge. Another important consideration is the timing of the election or re-election. The accused may want to delay making a final decision until they have had more time to review the evidence or negotiate a plea deal. In some cases, it may be beneficial to delay the election until closer to trial in order to assess the strength of the prosecution's case. In order to maximize their chances of a successful outcome, the accused may also want to consider retaining the services of an experienced criminal defense lawyer. A lawyer can provide valuable advice and guidance on the best strategies to employ in dealing with this section of the Criminal Code. They can also help the accused make a informed decision regarding their election or re-election. Overall, there are several strategic considerations to take into account when dealing with section 565(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. By carefully considering these factors and employing strategic tactics, the accused can increase their chances of a successful outcome in their case.