section 356(3)


This section outlines the penalties for committing an offence under subsection (1) of section 356 of the Criminal Code of Canada.


356(3) Everyone who commits an offence under subsection (1) (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years; or (b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.


Section 356(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the potential consequences for individuals who commit an offence under subsection (1). Subsection (1) deals with the act of forgery, which is defined as the creation of a false document with the intention of deceiving others. Forgery is a serious criminal offence in Canada, as it has the potential to undermine the integrity of legal and financial systems. Under Section 356(3), an individual who commits an offence under subsection (1) is guilty of an indictable offence and may face imprisonment for a term of up to 10 years. An indictable offence is a criminal offence that is considered to be of a serious nature, and is typically prosecuted using more formal legal procedures. This type of offence carries more severe penalties than a summary offence. Alternatively, an individual who commits an offence under subsection (1) may be guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction. Summary conviction offences are less serious than indictable offences and are typically heard in a lower court with less formal legal procedures. The penalty for a summary conviction offence is typically a fine or a short-term imprisonment. Overall, the purpose of Section 356(3) is to provide clear guidelines on the potential consequences of committing an offence under subsection (1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. By outlining both indictable and summary conviction penalties, this section serves to deter individuals from engaging in forgery and other criminal activities that can harm legal and financial systems.


Section 356(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the punishment for the offence of theft, which is defined in subsection (1) of the same section. Theft involves the dishonest appropriation of another person's property without their consent, with the intention of depriving them of it permanently or temporarily. This provision serves as a deterrent to those who may be contemplating stealing from others. The first punishment option stated in subsection (3)(a) is imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years. This is an indictable offence, which is a serious criminal offence that requires a trial by jury. Such offences carry the most significant penalties. This punishment may be given to offenders who commit theft of a large amount of property or are involved in stealing from a vulnerable person such as someone disabled, elderly, or with a vulnerable mental or physical condition. The goal of this punishment is to ensure that the offender pays the price for their actions and to deter others from committing a similar offence. The second punishment option stated in subsection (3)(b) is fines or imprisonment for a term of not more than two years less a day. This is a summary conviction offence, which is a less severe offence than an indictable offence. A summary conviction involves a summary trial, which means a trial heard by a judge in a lower court. Summary convictions are reserved for less serious offences where the penalty is not as severe. Persons who steal lesser or inferior property can fall under this category. The goal of this punishment is to ensure that the offender learns that their actions are unacceptable and to discourage them from repeating the offence. This section provides punishments that are intended to protect the rights of regular citizens, businesses, companies and all other property owners. It discourages illegal activities that may lead to loss of life or damage to property. Theft is a serious offence, as it not only affects the victim financially, but also traumatizes them emotionally. It is essential to have stringent laws and regulations to ensure that justice prevails and appropriate action is taken against the guilty. In conclusion, section 356(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides clear and concise penalties for the offence of theft. It caters to the seriousness of the offence by outlining harsher punishment options for those who steal large amounts or from vulnerable individuals and a less severe option for those who steal minor property. It serves as a warning to those who may be contemplating theft that their actions will not go unpunished. Overall, it is a necessary provision in ensuring that our society is built around the principles of justice and fairness.


Section 356(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada identifies the penalties for committing an offence under subsection (1). This provision applies to individuals who intentionally damage or destroy property that belongs to others, and the corresponding penalty depends on the nature and severity of the damage. Specifically, depending on the evidence that prosecutors have, offenders can face up to ten years in prison and hefty fines, or more moderate sanctions, depending on whether the prosecution proceeds by way of indictment or summary conviction. In light of these sanctions, individuals accused of an offence under subsection (1) must adopt several strategic considerations when dealing with this provision. Among the factors or considerations that could influence defence strategies are the gravity of the offence and the available evidence. Other factors that may shape a defence strategy include the competence and experience of the defence counsel, the defendant's willingness to plea bargain, the defendant's past criminal record, and their financial resources. When dealing with a charge under Section 356(3), here are some strategies that defendants can consider: 1. Hire Experienced Defence Counsel The first step in crafting a successful defence strategy is to hire experienced criminal defence attorneys who have a proven record of successfully defending clients against charges of causing damages to property. Such legal practitioners can delve deep into the evidence and determine whether the prosecution has enough evidence to support the charges against the defendant. 2. Explore Possible Defences The second step is to identify any possible defences that may apply in the case. Some of the common defences that defendants might utilize in such cases include proving that the damage was accidental or a result of self-defence, or demonstrating that they did not intentionally or recklessly damage the property. Defendants might also argue that they lacked the necessary intent to commit the offence or, alternatively, that they were under duress or coercion when they committed the offence. 3. Explore Plea Deals The third step is to consider whether plea bargaining is a viable option. A defendant may agree to plead guilty to a lesser charge in exchange for a reduction in sentence. This option might be acceptable if the defence lawyer concludes that the prosecutor has sufficient evidence to support the charge and a conviction is likely. Therefore, plea bargaining could be used to obtain a better outcome for the defendant, maintaining privacy and avoiding trial proceedings that can damage the defendant's reputation. 4. Mitigate the Fines And Penalties Another strategy that an accused person could pursue is to mitigate the penalties they face. For instance, a defendant and their defence attorney can work to show that the damage was not severe, and present favorable factors that suggest that the offender's sentence should be lessened. This could involve emphasizing favourable personal characteristics, such as the offender's exemplary conduct before and after the incident, employment history, mental health issues, drug and alcohol counseling acceptance, and so on. 5. Negotiate Payment of Restitution Finally, a defendant could further advocate for reduced penalties by accepting to pay restitution. Restitution means offering to restore the victim's loss by replacing or repairing the damaged property. By offering restitution, the offender can demonstrate an assumption of responsibility for their actions, and prosecution may opt to seek lesser sanctions because of it. In summary, dealing with Section 356(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada involves strategic considerations that require professional expertise. Engaging experienced criminal defence lawyers and exploring legal strategies can ultimately mitigate the penalties and lead to a positive verdict for the defendant. These strategic considerations range from plea bargaining, agreeing to pay restitution, exploring possible defences, and seeking mitigation of the fines and penalties that the offender would otherwise face.