INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
The decision of the court of appeal can be enforced in the same way as a summary conviction court.
SECTION WORDING
839(4) The decision of the court of appeal may be enforced in the same manner as if it had been made by the summary conviction court before which the proceedings were originally heard and determined.
EXPLANATION
Section 839(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the procedures for enforcing a decision made by the court of appeal. This section states that the decision of the court of appeal can be enforced in the same manner as if it had been made by the summary conviction court before which the proceedings were originally heard and determined. This provision is important because it ensures that the decisions made by the court of appeal are given the same weight and value as those made by the lower court. It also provides for a consistent and uniform approach to the enforcement of judgments across different courts in Canada. In practical terms, this section means that once the court of appeal has made a decision, it can be enforced by the same means as if the original decision had been made by the summary conviction court. For example, if the court of appeal orders a fine, the same collection methods that would have been used if the fine had originally been imposed by the summary conviction court can be employed to collect the fine. This provision also serves as a safeguard against appeals made solely to delay enforcement of a decision. By ensuring that the decision of the court of appeal is enforced using the same methods as the original decision, it prevents parties from using the appeals process to evade the consequences of their actions. Overall, section 839(4) helps to ensure that the decisions made by the courts are enforced consistently and fairly across all levels of the Canadian judicial system.
COMMENTARY
Section 839(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that outlines the way in which the decision of a higher court can be enforced in Canadian criminal law. This section of the code empowers the court of appeal to enforce its decisions in the same manner as if it had been made by the summary conviction court originally. This provision is essential in ensuring that the rule of law is enforced, and the judgment of a higher court is respected and followed. The Criminal Code of Canada provides various codes, sections, and provisions that relate to the criminal justice system. One of its major functions is to provide a framework for prosecution, trial, and sentencing of offenders. Section 839(4) is specifically designed to ensure that the judgment of the court of appeal is followed, and its decision is binding in criminal proceedings. The main aim of section 839(4) is to ensure that the decision of a higher court, such as the court of appeal, is respected and enforced. In many cases, the judgment of a higher court can be overturned on appeal, leading to the release of the accused or the reduction of their sentence. However, where the court of appeal upholds the decision of the lower court or alters the sentence, it is essential that such a decision is respected and enforced. Section 839(4) ensures that the ruling of the court of appeal is enforced in the same way as if it had been made by the summary conviction court. This means that the judgment is binding in criminal proceedings, and any noncompliance or disregard for the decision could result in contempt proceedings against the offender. Moreover, this provision gives the court of appeal power to enforce its decision, ensuring that the correct process of the law is followed, and justice is served. The appeal process is a vital mechanism for ensuring correct decisions are made in criminal proceedings. It provides an opportunity for flawed judgments to be reviewed, and errors corrected. The process of appeal is an integral part of the Canadian legal system, and section 839(4) ensures that the decisions made during the appeal process are respected and enforced. In conclusion, section 839(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is significant in ensuring that the judgment of higher courts is binding, and the rule of law is followed. It allows the court of appeal to enforce its decisions in the same manner as if it had been made by the summary conviction court before which the proceedings were originally heard and determined. This provision is essential in maintaining the integrity and fairness of the Canadian criminal justice system. Without section 839(4), the decisions made during the appeal process could be disregarded, leading to lawlessness and a breakdown of the justice system.
STRATEGY
Section 839(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada has several strategic implications for both the prosecution and defense during the appeal process. This provision of the Criminal Code governs the enforcement of decisions by the court of appeal and requires parties to strategize with the enforcement mechanism in mind. One strategic consideration when dealing with section 839(4) is that a party may choose to request a stay of execution pending appeal. This is particularly relevant for those awaiting trial, as a guilty verdict could lead to imprisonment or other significant restrictions on their freedom. However, based on the right arguments, an applicant can convince the court to grant a stay of execution until the appeal is heard considering the preservative principle in administration of justice. Additionally, the prosecution may use section 839(4) to their advantage by requesting an immediate enforcement of the decision. This is particularly relevant in cases involving violent or dangerous offenders, where quick action is necessary to protect the public from further harm. The prosecution can argue that the decision from the court of appeal should be enforced immediately, as the nature of the offense and offender presents an imminent threat to public safety. Another strategic consideration is that a party may choose to argue against the enforcement of the decision of the court of appeal. This is typically done by the defense, who may raise concerns about the impact of the decision on the defendant's rights or liberties. For example, if the court of appeal decision calls for a longer sentence than originally handed down by the lower court, the defense may argue that the defendant's interests and rights would be better served by maintaining the original sentence. In such cases, a judge may be convinced to award sentence in a moderate degree to satisfy both ends. Finally, parties may choose to engage in plea bargaining during the appeal process as a strategic consideration. Plea bargaining involves the defendant agreeing to plead guilty to a lesser offense in exchange for a reduced sentence or other concessions from the prosecution. The appeal process may provide new information or opportunities for both parties, leading to a reassessment of their positions and an increased likelihood of reaching an agreement. In conclusion, section 839(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada has several strategic implications that parties must consider when dealing with the appeal process. These include requesting a stay of execution, requesting immediate enforcement, arguing against enforcement, or engaging in plea bargaining. With the right strategy, parties may be able to achieve their desired outcomes and protect the interests of their clients.