Criminal Code of Canada - section 650.01(4) - When court orders presence of accused

section 650.01(4)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section allows the court to issue a summons or warrant to compel the presence of an accused person designated counsel.

SECTION WORDING

560.01(4) If the court orders the accused to be present otherwise than by appearance by the designated counsel, the court may (a) issue a summons to compel the presence of the accused and order that it be served by leaving a copy at the address contained in the designation; or (b) issue a warrant to compel the presence of the accused.

EXPLANATION

Section 650.01(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada determines how the accused should be present in court during criminal proceedings. It states that the court may order the accused to be present in a way other than through designated counsel. In such a situation, the court has two options to compel the presence of the accused. Firstly, it may choose to issue a summons, which would require the accused to appear in person. This summons could be served by leaving a copy at the address specified in the designation. Alternatively, the court may issue a warrant to compel the accused's appearance, which is a more forceful option. In such a case, a warrant is issued, and the accused is arrested by law enforcement agents and produced in court. This warrants authorized law enforcement agents to take the accused into custody and bring them before the court. This section of the Criminal Code of Canada is vital because it ensures that the accused is present during critical stages of the criminal proceedings, such as trial and sentencing. It also gives the court the power to enforce its orders and ensure that the accused complies with them. Additionally, it provides guidance on the methods that can be used to compel appearance and maintains the integrity of the justice system. Ultimately, this section plays a vital role in ensuring that justice is appropriately served.

COMMENTARY

Section 650.01(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines two possible scenarios in which an accused person can be compelled to appear in court: either through a summons, or through a warrant. While both options are available to the court, they have different implications for the accused person and their legal representation. A summons is a court order that requires an individual to appear in court at a specific time and place. In the case of an accused person who has designated counsel (i.e. a lawyer who is representing them in court), the court may issue a summons to compel their presence at a hearing or trial. This summons can be served by leaving a copy at the address contained in the designation. In other words, if the accused's lawyer has provided the court with their address, the summons can be served at that address. On the other hand, a warrant is a court order that authorizes law enforcement officials to apprehend an individual and bring them before the court. In the case of an accused person who has designated counsel, the court may issue a warrant to compel their presence if they fail to appear after being summoned. This means that if the accused person does not show up in court as ordered, the court can issue a warrant for their arrest. The use of a summons versus a warrant can have significant implications for an accused person and their legal representation. If a summons is issued and served, the accused person can attend court voluntarily and with their lawyer present. This gives them an opportunity to prepare for their hearing or trial and to discuss their legal options with their lawyer. On the other hand, if a warrant is issued, the accused person may be arrested and brought before the court against their will. This can be a stressful and potentially traumatic experience, particularly if they are not prepared and do not have their lawyer present. In some cases, the use of a warrant may be necessary if there is reason to believe that the accused person is a flight risk or poses a danger to the public. However, in most cases, a summons is the preferred option as it allows the accused person to attend court voluntarily and with their legal representation. Overall, Section 650.01(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the court with the authority to compel the presence of an accused person through a summons or warrant. While both options are available, the use of a summons is generally preferred as it allows the accused person to attend court voluntarily and with their legal representation. However, in cases where there is a significant risk of flight or danger to the public, a warrant may be necessary. In either case, the court must balance the interests of all parties involved and ensure that the accused person is afforded a fair trial.

STRATEGY

Section 650.01(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the court with the power to order an accused person to be present in court. This can be done by either issuing a summons or a warrant to compel the accused's attendance. However, when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code, there are several strategic considerations that should be taken into account. These considerations include the likelihood of securing the accused's attendance, the impact on the accused's right to a fair trial, and the potential impact on the case itself. One of the most important considerations when dealing with Section 650.01(4) of the Criminal Code is the likelihood of securing the accused's attendance. If the accused is unwilling to attend court voluntarily, a summons or warrant may be necessary to compel their attendance. However, this can be a difficult proposition, especially if the accused is actively avoiding law enforcement. In such cases, other strategies such as surveillance, stakeouts, or even negotiating with the accused's legal counsel may be necessary. Another important consideration is the impact that issuing a summons or warrant may have on the accused's right to a fair trial. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees all accused persons the right to a fair trial, which includes the right to attend their own trial. Therefore, any measures taken to compel an accused's attendance must be balanced against the accused's right to a fair trial. If there is a risk that the accused's right to a fair trial will be compromised, alternative strategies such as negotiating with the accused or their legal counsel may be more appropriate. In addition, there may be strategic considerations related to the case itself. For example, if the accused is a key witness in the case, their absence could have a significant impact on the outcome of the trial. In such cases, it may be necessary to take more aggressive measures to ensure their attendance. Conversely, if the accused's testimony is unlikely to have a significant impact on the case, it may be more appropriate to avoid issuing a summons or warrant and instead focus on other aspects of the case. Some strategies that could be employed when dealing with Section 650.01(4) of the Criminal Code include negotiating with the accused or their legal counsel, using surveillance or other tactics to locate and apprehend the accused, and seeking the assistance of law enforcement or other government agencies. The specific strategy employed will depend on the circumstances of the case, the likelihood of securing the accused's attendance, and the potential impact on the accused's right to a fair trial. In conclusion, Section 650.01(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the court with the power to order an accused person to be present in court. However, when dealing with this section, there are several strategic considerations that must be taken into account. These include the likelihood of securing the accused's attendance, the impact on the accused's right to a fair trial, and the potential impact on the case itself. By carefully considering these factors and employing appropriate strategies, lawyers can increase their chances of securing the desired outcome in their cases.